On December 29, 2023, MF, a 35 year old nursing student, was stopped by the State Police on Route 1 in Saugus. The police cited him for an array of offenses:
RS, a 79 year old retired engineer, enjoys hiking in the forests of Essex County, MA. The problem is he enjoys hiking naked. You could not make this case up. The environmental police had received several complaints of a man hiking in the nude. Unbeknownst to RS, a hunter had lawfully installed a hunting camera on a tree in the woods. The camera captured RS hiking nude on four occassions between August 2024 and October 2024. On one of his hikes, RS noticed the camera and took it down and brought it home. Unfortunately for RS the camera did two things that RS did not expect: (1) it captured him nude at home and sent those images to the hunter’s computer and (2) it sent out its GPS coordinates to the hunter’s computer. The hunter in turn gave the images and the GPS coordinates to the Environmental Police. The GPS coordinates led the police to RS’s home. The police got a search warrant, went to RS’s home, seized the camera, and charged RS with a host of crimimal offenses. The criminal charges included Hunter Harassment (the removing of the camera), Larceny (the taking of the camera), and 4 counts of indecent exposure. The case was set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing.
RS met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately reached out to the Environmental Police and, more importantly, Attorney Lewin contacted the General Counsel’s Office for the state office of environmental affairs. Attorney Lewin was able to make contact with the Assistant General Counsel for the Department who would make the decision about whether the case would go forward or not. In addition, Attorney Lewin had RS meet with a counselor who dealt with exhibitionist behavior; the counselor gave Attorney Lewin a very favorable report. Attorney Lewin engaged in lengthy negotiations with the Department and was able to get the Department to agree to recommend that a criminal complaint NOT be issued against RS.
On December 12, 2024, RS and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lawrence District Court for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing on the Application for Criminal Complaint that had been filed by the Environmental Police. The environmental police were present and presented their detailed case against RS. Attorney Lewin explained to the Clerk-Magistrate the lengthy negotiations that had taken place with the Department and the agreement that had been reached.
On October 17, 2024, IS, a 33 year old counselor was stopped in North Andover for speeding and operating an uninsured motor vehicle. IS has a substantial motor vehicle record and a finding against him would have caused his license to be suspended. To his credit, within two days of getting the citation IS got his car insured and got the registration renewed (the police did not charge him with the offense of operating an unregistered vehicle). IS failed to request a clerk-magistrate hearing and a criminal complaint issued against him. IS received a summons in the mail to appear in Lawrence Distrioct Court for an arraignment on Decembedr 20, 2024. IS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.
Attorney Lewin, with assistance from IS, gathered together all the necessary paperwork (the new insurance policy showing that it was purcahsed two days after the incident as well as the new registration certificate). On December 20, 2024 IS and Attorney Lewin went to Lawrence District Court for the arraignment. Attorney Lewin met with the Assistant District Attorney and furnished copies of the new insurance policy and the new registration to the Assistant DA. At Attorney Lewin’s request, the Assistant District Attorney agreed to DISMISS the uninsured motor vehicle charge prior to arraignment and the Assistahnt DA agreed to enter a finding of NOT responsible on the speeding charge. This was the very best of all possible results.
By dismissing the case prior to arraignment this case did NOT go onto IS’s crimimal record. In addition, IS did not suffer any penalty against his driver’s license from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. It was a complete win.
On August 5, 2024, JT, a 40 year old Nurse was living in Cambridge. JT owned a car but was not using it and had it parked in her driveway. In Massachusetts you must have a car registered and insured in order to legally park it in your driveway. The car was in fact insured; however, it was not registered. She had an old set of out of state plates that belonged to her boyfriend. She attached those plates to the car to make it appear as if the car was registered. On the night of August 5, 2024 JT and her boyfriend got into an argument and he left their apartment. JT went out to look for him and fired up the car and drove into Boston looking for him. She got pulled over for speeding by the State Police. That is when the trouble started. The State Trooper ran the plates that were on the car and discovered they came back to another vehicle that did not belong to her. The Trooper ordered her out of the car; had the car towed; and cited her for two criminal offenses (wrongfully attaching plates and operating an uninsured vehicle) and two civil infractions (speeding and operating an unregistered vehicle). JT failed to request a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing (big mistake – as the case probably could have been resolved at a Clerk-Maguistrate Hearing without any charges beuing issued against her). The case was set down for an arraignment on Tuesday, December 3, 2024. JT failed to appear for her arraignment and a warrant for her arrest was issued at Brighton Municipal Court. The Court then notified JT that a warrant for her arrest had been issued by the court.
On Thursday evening, December 12, 2024, JT contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. The next day, Friday, December 13, 2024, Attorney Lewin obtained copies of the police report and all the court papers. It was immediately obvious to Attorney Lewin that the police had failed to comply with the no-fix ticket law. That law requires the police, among other things, to file the citation with the court within 6 business days of the violation. (Most lawyers have never even heard of the six day rule – but Attorney Robert Lewin knows the rule well and uses it all the time to get cases dismissed.) Over the weekend, Attorney Lewin prepared a Motion to Dismiss ALL the charges against JT due to the police failure to comply with the six day rule.
On Tuesday, December 17, 2024, Attormey Lewin and JT appeared in Boston Municipal Court – Brighton Division. Attorney Lewin had his Motion to Dismiss all prepared and ready to file at Court. First, however, Attorney Lewin went down to the District Attorney’s Office to speak with the Assistant District Attorney. Attorney Lewin had documents to show that the car was now fully registered and insured (and that it was insured on the date JT was pulled over). Attorney Lewin explained to the Assistant DA that JT had no crimimal record, that she was a nurse, and that she was now enrolled in a graduate (Masters) degree nursing program. The Assistant DA told Attorney Lewin that the Commonwealth would agree to the warrant being cancelled, the two criminal charges being DISMISSED prior to arraignment, and that findings of NOT responsible could be entered on the two civil violations. It was a complete and total win – and Attorney Lewin never took the Motion tio Dismiss out of his briefcase!
FL is a 26 year old Academic Advisor at a local college. FL is also a compulsive shoplifter. On June 10, 2024, June 11, 2024, and again on July 29, 2024 FL was caught on camera shoplifting at a local Target store. Store security was not able to stop FL as he left the store, but they did get a license plate number of the car he was driving as he left the parking lot. The plate number was turned over to the Lowell Police and they traced the plate back to FL. On August 1, 2024 the police went to FL’s home and quickly identified FL as the person caught on the security cameras at the store. When questionned FL told the police that he may have failed – by mistake(!) – to scan several items. What the security video actually showed was FL scanning the tag of an inexpensive item several times while putting more expensive items into his shoppinjg bag as if the more expensive items had been scanned. The police told FL that he would receive a notice to go to court.
Within days, FL received a notice of a Magistrate’s Hearing alleging three counts of shoplifting. The hearing was scheduled for Friday, December 6, 2024 at Lowell District Court. FL contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained a copy of the police report. Attorney Lewin contacted the Lowell Police Prosecutor to discuss the case and Attorney Lewin also reached out to the Asset Protection team at Target. Attorney Lewin took a full background history from FL. It was immediately apparent to Attorney Lewin that if FL were actually charged with shoplifting (which would brand FL as a THIEF) that his job as an Academic Advisor would be lost.
On December 6, 2024 FL and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lowell District Court for the Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin explained FL’s background to the Clerk-Magistratem, stressing the facts that he had no criminmal record, that he had a good education, and that he had a good job. Attorney Lewin asked the Clerk-Magistrate NOT to issue a crimimal complainmt. Prior to the hearing Attorney Lewin had spoken with the police prosecutor (this is called good case preparation). After Attorney Lewin made his pitch to the Clerk-Magistrate, the Police Prosecutor told the Clerk-Magistrate that he had no objection to what Attorney Lewin was requesting. The Clerk-Magistrate then continued the hearing for 3 months to March 14, 2025. The Magistrate then ordered that if FL stayed out of trouble with the law, then on Mardch 14, 2025 no one had to return to court and the matter would be dismissed without a criminal complaint being issued agasinst FL.
On March 27, 2024,CG, a 53 year old nurse from Beverly, was driving from her home in Beverly to Shop & Shop. It was in the mid-afternoon. As she traveled down a residential street, she noticed a small truck with a trailer attached, parked on the right hand side of the street. As she passed by the truck she heard a bang. She did not see anyone around and she continued down the street. She went to Stop & Shop and in the parking lot she noticed that her passenger side mirror was damaged and that pieces of the mirror were missing. She then returned to the place where the truck had been. She slowly drove by and did not notice the police officer and man that were standing off to the side. She did not stop and continued home. The man who’s truck had been hit actually got CG’s plate number and a description of her car at the time of the crash and gave that information to the police. The Beverly police then issued a citation to CG for leaving the scene of a property damage accident and no inspection sticker. (The inspection sticker on her car had expired.) CG failed to attend a Clerk-Magistrate hearing (big mistake) and a criminal complaint was issued against her for leaving the scene and no inspection sticker. CG met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.
Attorney Lewin immediately began his investigation of the case. It turned out that the damage to the truck was quite minor. There was a ladder on the back of the trailer that was knocked loose. The ladder simply needed to be reattached to the back of the trailer. Attorney Lewin spoke to CG’s insurance company to determine if any claim had been made and none was made. Attorney Lewin then met with the Assistant DA handling the case and was able to get the Assistant DA to agree to what is called a “general continuance” of the case. A general continuance is when the case is simply left open for a period opt time and then dismissed. It is NOT a plea bargain. There is no guilty plea; there is no admission of any kind. At the end of the period of time the case is dismissed. Attorney Lewin calls a “general continuance” a dismissal that takes a little time to get there. (It is quite different from a “cwof – a continuance without a finding”. A cwof is a plea bargain and involves an admission of guilt; a general continuance involves no admissions of guilt at all.)
On October 11, 2024, CG and Attorney Lewin appeared in Salem District Court and the Judge continued CG’s case generally for six months. At that time – if CG stays out of trouble – the criminal charge of Leaving the Scene will be DISMISSED. In addition, the Judge entered a finding of NOT responsible on the inspection sticker violation. Attorney Lewin explained that right after this incident CG went and had her car inspected and got a sticker.
On August 15, 2024, BS, a 57 year old professional woman, went to the Target store in Danvers. She shopped and filled up a shopping cart with merchandise. She then went to the self-checkout area and began to scan her items. When she was done scanning she paid $313.64 on her credit card and then headed out of the store. Just as she got out of the store she was stopped by store security and then brought back into the store to the loss prevention office. There was $276.87 in merchandise in her cart that she had not paid for. There was video of her at the self-checkout which allegedly showed her not scanning certain items. BS was told she would receive a notice from the Salem District Court. BS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.
BS insisted that she did not intentionally fail to scan anything. Apparently there were some items at the bottom of her cart that she mistakenly forgot to scan. The Danvers Police had been called to the store and Attorney Lewin was able to obtain a copy of the Danvers Police report. That report seemed to corroborate what BS was saying. Attorney Lewin made contact with the loss prevention officer form the store and advocated for the store not to seek a criminal complaint.
On September 20, 2024, BS and Attorney Lewin appeared at Salem District Court for the hearing. Attorney Lewin was thoroughly prepared. Attorney Lewin furnished a copy of the Danvers Police Report to the Clerk Magistrate. That report (which the store did not want the Clerk-Magistrate to see) corroborated what BS was saying.
On August 22, 2024, VM, a 43 year old Medical Practice Manager, co-hosted a high school graduation party for his niece. The party was held at a friend of VM’s house in Methuen. VM’s family and nine friends of VM’s niece were invited and attended. The friends of VM’s niece were all under age 21. At the party there was hard liquor and beer available that had been put out by the home owner. The party got a bit loud, someone called the police, the police arrived, and saw the alcohol and charged both the homeowner and VM with furnishing alcohol to minors. The home owner had a clerk-magistrate hearing, represented himself, and the clerk-magistrate issued a criminal complaint against him for furnishing alcohol to a minor.
VM contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin took a detailed statement of the facts from VM and from his niece and it became very apparent that VM had NOT furnished alcohol to anyone. Attorney lewin obtained the police report and there was nothing in the police report that indicated that VM had furnished alcohol to anyone. The police were relying on the fact that VM had co-hosted the party and was therefore responsible for making alcohol available to the minors. Attorney Lewin contacted the Methuen Police prosecutor prior to the hearing and advocated that there was no evidence that VM had done anything wrong.
On September 12, 2024, VM, his niece, and Attorney Lewin went to Lawrence District Court for the hearing. The Clerk-Magistrate listened to the police presentation. Attorney Lewin then argued to the Clerk-Magistrate that there was NO evidence that VM had furnished alcohol to anyone. The Clerk-Magistrate agreed with Attorney Lewin and made a finding of NO probable cause and DENIED the police application for a criminal complaint.
On Friday, May 31, 2024, LO, a 25 year old prep-cook, was on her way to work and was running late. She came to an intersection in Haverhill and had a red light. She ran the light almost causing an accident – all in the view of a Mass. State Trooper who was sitting in his patrol car. The officer immediately put on his blue lights and pulled LO over. He gave her a citation for Negligent Operation (which carries a 60 day loss of license) and Failure to Stop for the Red Light.
LO contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover and retained Attorney Lewin. Attorney Lewin instructed LO to immediately bring her citation to Haverhill District Court and request a hearing. LO did that and a hearing was set up for August 6, 2024. Attorney Lewin reached out to the State Police Prosecutor and advocated on LO’s behalf with the police prosecutor. On August 6, 2024, Attorney Lewin and LO appeared in Haverhill District Court. Although there was probable cause to issue the criminal complaint against LO for the Negligent Operation and the Failure to Stop charges, Attorney Lewin pointed out that LO had no criminal record and no driver record. Attorney Lewin advocated for the Clerk-Magistrate to NOT issue a criminal complaint against LO. Attorney Lewin had fully prepared LO to address the Clerk-Magistrate.
The police prosecutor told the Clerk-Magistrate that he had no objection to Attorney Lewin’s request. The Clerk-Magistrate then continued the hearing for six months to February 4, 2025 and ordered that if LO was in no further trouble with the law then then entire matter would be dismissed on that date.
On January 11, 2024, SR, a 68 year old retired salesman, went to s store in a strip mall in Tyngsboro. He did some shopping and then walked to his car. He got in his car and left the mall and drove to his destination in New Hampshire. He never hit anything nor anyone. Later he received a phone call from the Tyngsboro police. They asked if he had been at the mall and he said yes. They asked if he had collided with another vehicle and he said absolutely not. The police told him that they had a witness who saw him strike the vehicle, pause, and then drive away without stopping. Moreover, the police said that the witness had taken a picture of SR’s car and his license plate. In addition the initial police report recited that the police had a video from the mall security cameras that recited that “a vehicle matching the description of SR’s vehicle” backed out of a parking space, struck another vehicle, pause, and then take off”. The police felt they had an open and shut case. The police issued SR a citation for leaving the scene of a property damage accident. SR requested a Clerk-Magistrate hearing. SR went to the hearing without a lawyer and the Clerk-Magistrate issued a criminal complaint against SR for Leaving the Scene. SR was shocked as he knew that he had not struck another vehicle.
SR consulted with and hired Attorney Robert D. Lewin from Andover. On June 18, 2024, SR and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court for SR’s arraignment. Attorney Lewin had prepared and filed a Motion for Discovery that sought production of the video and photographic evidence. At the arraignment the Judge allowed the Motion and ordered the DA to furnish the video and photos to Attorney Lewin by the next court date (August 7, 2024). SR insisted to Attorney Lewin that he was absolutely innocent and if there was a video it would prove him innocent. Attorney Lewin began to hound the DA’s Office for a copy of the video. Attorney Lewin sent a flurry of emails and made a number of phone calls to the DA demanding a copy of the video. It became obvious that the DA (and the police) were having some issue with producing the video. It appeared that someone was hiding something; that no one wanted Attorney Lewin and SR to see the video.
On August 7, 2024, SR and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court. Attorney Lewin was ready to raise the roof off the Courthouse because the DA had failed to produce the video. At 8:45 AM the DA approached Attorney Lewin and handed Attorney Lewin a “supplemental” police report. The “supplemental” police report recited that upon closer examination of the video it was clear that it was a woman who entered a vehicle (not SR’s vehicle) and then backed up and struck the other vehicle. And then the woman stopped, got out of her car, and went back into the mall. The video clearly showed that SR’s vehicle was NOT involved and that SR was NOT involved. The DA told Attorney Lewin that they would be filing a dismissal of the charge. At 9:00 am the case was called and it was dismissed.
Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer Blog