Larceny/Stealing

March 9, 2026

10 Time Shoplifter – Dismissed

OQ, a 39 year old Indian immigrant, was caught shoplifting at the Target Store in Wilmington on January 31, 2026. She was brought back to the loss prevention office and the Wilmington Police responded. The loss prevention officer at the store told OQ (and the police) that OQ was “a serial shoplifter as their records show nine other incidents of shoplifting from multiple stores”. OQ had her two young children with her. The police did not arrest her, but told her that she would receive a notice from Woburn District Court.

OQ immediately sought out a lawyer and contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately contated the Wilmington Police and was able to obtain a copy of the police report and the Target investigation report. Attorney Lewin also contacted the Target Corporate law firm.

The police filed an Application for a Criminal Complaint against OQ at Woburn District Court. The case was set up for a Clerk-Magistrate hearing on March 4, 2026. Attorney Lewin got OQ to pay restitution to Target for all the merchandise she had stolen and payment was made before the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin had several discussions with the Police Prosecutor and ultimately the police prosecutor agreed to recommend to the Clerk-Magistrate that NO complaint be issued againt OQ.

May 21, 2025

15 Time Shoplifter – Complaint Avoided

by Robert D. Lewin

On December 21, 2024, NP, a 35 year old female hospital operating room technician was caught shoplifting at the Target store in Lowell. She went through the self checkout without scanning an item. A loss prevention officer caught up to her and brought her back into the store. The Lowell Police were called to the store. The Target stores use facial recognition technology to identify shoplifters. Unfortunately for NP, this was the 15th time she had been observed (and recorded) shoplifting at Target in Lowell and Salem, NH. The police told NP she would receive papers to go to Lowell District Court.

NP consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. A Clerk-Magistrate hearing was set up for May 9, 2025. The purpose of the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing is for the Clerk-Magistrate to decide whether to issue a formal criminal complaint against the accused person. NP has no criminal record and a criminal record for shoplifting (which in reality is stealing) could cost her a job. If the Clerk-Magistrate issues a criminal complaint then the accused has to return to court for an arraignment in front of a Judge and a criminal record is created. If the Clerk-Magistrate can be persuaded not to issue a criminal complaint, then the accused is not charged and no criminal record is created. The Defense lawyer’s goal is to do his or her best to convince the Clerk-Magistrate not to issue the complaint.

Attorney Lewin went to work immediately. Attorney Lewin has established an excellent working relationship with Asset Loss Prevention team at Target and with the Police Prosecutors from Lowell. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Asset Protection team at Target. Attorney Lewin also contacted the police prosecutor at the Lowell PD. Attorney Lewin was able to get the police and Target not to oppose Attorney Lewin’s request for a criminal complaint NOT to be issued against NP.

April 28, 2025

Warrants in 2 Court Cleared: Larceny of Motor Vehicle Case – DISMISSED

by Robert D. Lewin

On March 3, 2025, JN, a 34 year old production supervisor, consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin in Andover. JN had an outstanding warrant in Lawrence District Court (on a case where he owed money to the court) and an outstanding warrant in Haverhill District Court (on an open case where he was charged with Larceny of a Motor Vehicle). JN’s license was suspended because of the two cases and he needed to get it back. One of the problems with the charge of Larceny of a Motor Vehicle is that a conviction carries a one-year loss of license.

Attorney Lewin investigated the two cases and was convinced that he could get the case in Lawrence closed by having JN pay the money that was owing to the court. More importantly, Attorney Lewin was convinced that JN was not guilty of the Larceny of a Motor Vehicle charge. The charge arose out of JN’s failure to return (and pay for) a car that he had rented from a car rental agency.

On March 14, 2025 JN and Attorney Lewin began the day in Haverhill District Court. The warrant in Haverhill District Court was cancelled, JN was arraigned, and the case in Haverhill was continued to April 18, 2025 for a pre-trial hearing. At Attorney Lewin’s request the Judge in Haverhill did NOT hold JN in custody for the warrant in Lawrence, but rather directed JN and Attorney Lewin to go to Lawrence Court that same day to address the warrant in Lawrence. Attorney Lewin and JN left Haverhill and went straight to Lawrence District Court. Within an hour JN and Attorney Lewin were in front of the Judge in Lawrence District Court. Attorney Lewin explained that JN owed money to the court and he was ready to pay it immediately. The Judge in Lawrence cancelled the warrant; JN went to the cashier’s office and paid the money he owed; the Judge ordered the case in Lawrence District Court DISMISSED.

December 28, 2024

THE NAKED HIKER – CRIMINAL CHARGES AVOIDED

by Robert D. Lewin

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.

December 18, 2024

3 Time Shoplifter – Criminal Complaint Avoided in Lowell District Court

by Robert D. Lewin

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.

June 2, 2024

Alien (Indian) Shoplifter NOT Charged

by Robert D. Lewin

On April 29, 2024, ML, a 32 year old Indian woman, was caught shoplifting at a large department store in Cambridge. She had been shoplifting from that store for a considerable time and had now put in danger her ability to stay here in the U.S. She is in the U.S. on a student visa, and shoplifting (larceny) is a deportable offense. In May of 2024 she was due to graduate from one of the most prestigious universities in Boston with a graduate degree. ML contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained in detail the deportation consequences of a shoplifting conviction and he explained the importance of immediately opening a conversation with the police. ML retained Attorney Lewin.

Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the police prosecutor from Cambridge and then Attorney Lewin was able to speak with the actual officer who was investigating ML’s case and who would make the decision about prosecuting the case in court. Because ML had contacted Attorney Lewin immediately after being caught and before any court action had been begun, there was a chance (non-existent in most cases) that the case could be stopped BEFORE any court action was begun by the police (or the store). On May 17, 2024, after several productive conversations with the police, the police agreed NOT to bring any charges against ML, provided she stay out of the store for one year and provided that she pay $985 in restitution to the store. ML paid the restitution that same day. ML then attended her graduation!

It is very unusual to be able to “kill” one of these shoplifting cases at the “police station” level without the case going to a Clerk-Magistrate hearing. As a result of this disposition, Attorney Lewin explained the following to ML.

April 30, 2023

Shoplifting Charge Avoided (Alien)

by Robert D. Lewin

SV, a 39 year old Nigerian alien, was caught shoplifting on December 2, 2022 at Macy’s in Saugus. Unfortunately for SV, she was known to the loss prevention personnel at Macy’s as someone who had stolen from the store on previous occasions but had not been caught. The police charged SV and because she had a prior history at the store the police requested that the Clerk-Magistrate at Lynn District Court issue a criminal complaint against SV without affording her a clerk-magistrate hearing first. The clerk-magistrate granted the request of the police and SV received a summons in the mail to appear for an arraignment at Lynn District Court on April 4, 2023. SV consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Because of her status as an alien, having a record for shoplifting (a crime of moral wrongdoing) could lead to her being deported from the country and being denied citizenship.

Attorney Lewin immediately went to work on the case and obtained all the police reports. Most persons charged with shoplifting are afforded a clerk-magistrate hearing before a criminal complaint is issued. Many of these shoplifting cases get resolved favorably at the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing without a criminal complaint being issued. In SV’s case however, the criminal complaint against her had been issued without a hearing. The complaint was scheduled for an arraignment and it is the taking place of the arraignment that causes a criminal record to be created. And it is the creation of a criminal record for shoplifting that would create big problems for SV as an alien. It became very important for Attorney Lewin to try to avoid the arraignment from taking place.

Attorney Lewin prepared a lengthy motion (written request) to dismiss the charge against SV without the arraignment taking place. Attorney Lewin sent a copy of the Motion to the District Attorney’s Office before the scheduled arraignment date. On April 4, 2023 SV and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lynn District Court. Attorney Lewin met with the Assistant District Attorney handling the case and explained the devastating effects having a criminal record would have on SV. Attorney Lewin asked the Assistant District Attorney to agree to dismiss the case without the arraignment taking place. The Assistant District Attorney agreed.

December 19, 2021

Shoplifting Charge (Fourth Offense) Avoided

by Robert D. Lewin

On October 2, 2021, NS, a 38 year old alien (green card holder) from India was caught shoplifting in Macy’s in Saugus. Macy’s had her on video and actually had her on video on three prior occasions shoplifting in the store. The loss prevention officer escorted NS back to the security office and the Saugus Police were called. The Saugus Police took her information and did not arrest her; they told her she would receive a notice from the Lynn District Court.

NS and her husband began a search for a lawyer. NS and her husband consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained how lucky NS was that the police did not arrest her. They could have and then she would have been fingerprinted and she would have to appear before a Judge and a criminal record would have been created. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Saugus Police Prosecutor to request that the case be set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. This was done.

Attorney Lewin recognized that NS had a serious problem. NS completely lacked the ability to see the situation she was in. NS kept saying it was an accident and a mistake. Attorney Lewin pointed out that stealing merchandise four times from the same store was not an accident or mistake. On four different occasions NS had gone into the store with the intention to steal; she had picked up merchandise, placed it into a bag, then hidden the merchandise under other items in the bag, and then walked out of the store without paying. Those were all intentional acts that required planning and execution. Attorney Lewin explained to NS and her husband that if Attorney Lewin tried to sell her behavior to the police prosecutor and the Clerk-Magistrate as an “accident or mistake” that the police would not cooperate nor would the Clerk-Magistrate.

December 12, 2021

Forgery, Uttering, and Larceny Charges Avoided

by Robert D. Lewin

MS, a 47 year old female immigrant from Haiti, received a Notice of a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing from Chelsea District Court. The Chelsea Police had applied for a criminal complaint against MS for two counts of Forgery (checks), two counts of Uttering, and two counts of Larceny By False Pretenses. All six counts are felonies and all of the charges could lead to deportation. MS had absolutely no idea what the charges were about.

MS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately went to Chelsea Court and obtained copies of the Application for Criminal Complaint and the underlying police report. The police had received information from a bank investigator that an account holder at the bank had noticed a series of debits in her bank account for checks that she had not written. The checks were forged. Two of the forged checks had been made payable to MS and had been deposited in MS’s account at the bank.

The police applied for a criminal complaint against MS. It turns out that MS had in fact opened a joint bank account with her son, who was a minor at the time. Some months after opening the account, the two large checks made payable to MS were deposited into the account. The checks were in fact forgeries. Attorney Lewin contacted the bank investigator and asked for documentation showing that MS’s bank account was in fact a joint account. The bank investigator furnished the documentation to Attorney Lewin. Attorney Lewin also asked for the documentation showing how the account was opened. The Account opening documents show signature cards for both MS and her son and the initial deposit was a work check from MS’s son’s employment. The two large forged checks that were deposited were made out to MS; however, they were deposited remotely online so there was no surveillance photos or videos to show who made the deposit.

December 12, 2021

Nurse Charged With Larceny From A Disabled Patient Found NOT Guilty After 2-Day Jury Trial

by Robert D. Lewin

DC, a male nurse in his mid thirties, was employed at an agency that provides care for disabled adults. Care is provided in the patients’ homes and patients are also brought to a center where there are day activities for them. DC began caring for Paul (not the patient’s real name) in 2014. Paul suffered from Klumpke paralysis and had virtually no use of his hands and arms and also suffered from some mental disabilities. DC had earned a Bachelors Degree in Nursing and from his earnings as a nurse supported himself, his wife, and two very young children. Paul had a can in his bedroom in which he kept cash. In July of 2019 Paul reported to his father that he (Paul) had witnessed DC reach in to the can and remove $1,200.00 in cash from the can which Paul said DC then put in his pocket. Paul’s father reported this to the Police. The police came out to Paul’s house and interviewed Paul. The interview was recorded. Paul told the police in that interview that the theft had occurred during the previous Fall (i.e. the Fall of 2018) and that DC had taken the money and purchased a wood stove with it.

The police went to Newburyport District Court and took out a criminal complaint against DC for Larceny Over $250 from a Disabled Person. (The statute has now been changed from $250 to $1,200). The charge is a felony and a conviction would cost DC his Registration as a Nurse and a conviction certainly would have meant jail. DC consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained to DC that the case would take a great deal of preparation and would require a jury trial. There were a number of witnesses who had to be interviewed. Attorney Lewin’s investigator (a retired Chief of Police and former president of the Massachusetts Association of Private Investigators) did yeoman’s work in locating the witnesses and getting statements from the witnesses that would prove very helpful at the trial. DC provided Attorney Lewin with hundreds of pages of text messages between DC and Paul over a period of 3 years. Never once in those three years of text messages did Paul ever mention anything about DC stealing money. DC provided Attorney Lewin with twelve months of voice messages left by Paul on DC’s phone. Never once in any of those voice messages did Paul ever mention anything about DC stealing money. (Attorney Lewin has been practicing criminal law since 1971 and no client has worked as hard as DC did in helping to prepare his defense.) With Covid-19 it took 20 months to get a trial date. On May 4, 2021 a trial date of October 9, 2021 was set. That date got pushed back to November 9, 2021. In the weeks leading up to the trial Attorney Lewin and DC spent hours and hours preparing for the trial. Attorney Lewin interviewed and re-interviewed DC and his wife to prepare them for testifying in court. All of the recordings of the voice messages were readied to be played for the jury. All of the text messages were transcribed.

On November 9, 2021 all the parties appeared at Court ready for trial. A Jury was empaneled. The trial began. Paul and his father and the lead police investigator testified for the Commonwealth. Attorney Lewin called DC’s two supervisors, a co-worker who also had treated Paul, DC’s wife and then DC himself. DC was the last witness and his testimony finished at about 4:00 PM on November 9. On November 10, 2021 the parties all returned to Court. Attorney Lewin made a very forceful closing argument for a not guilty verdict. The Assistant District Attorney made a forceful closing argument for conviction. The Judge gave the jury their instructions and the Jurors went to the jury room to deliberate at about 11:30 AM. At 1:00 PM the court recessed for lunch. At 2:00 PM when all parties returned from lunch the Court Officer informed the Court that the Jury had reached a verdict. The jurors filed into the Courtroom. The Clerk instructed DC to stand. DC stood and the Clerk asked the foreperson of the Jury: “Madame foreperson has the jury reached a verdict.” The foreperson answered “Yes” The Clerk asked: “What say you, is the Defendant Guilty or Not Guilty of Larceny over $250 from a Disabled Person?”. The foreperson answered: “NOT guilty”