Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer BlogOn October 15, 2014, FD, a 14 year old Essex County High School student, in a moment of genius, sent a “prank” text to another student saying that if the student did not deliver a package to FD that FD would begin killing students at the school every ten minutes. The student receiving the text did not know whom the text was from and immediately brought the text to the attention of her teacher. The teacher immediately sent the student to the school security office. Law enforcement was immediately called in. Within minutes, the police investigation determined the phone from which the text was sent. FD was summonsed to the security office and was charged with Threat to Kill in a school. FD’s parents retained Attorney Robert Lewin. This could have been a disaster for FD; there is not a great deal of tolerance or sympathy for people who threaten to kill students in a public school. Attorney Lewin spoke immediately with the Police Officer who headed the investigation as well as the police prosecutor from the town where this happened. Attorney Lewin put together a written report of FD’s background and presented it to the police along with a written proposal that FD’s case be diverted out of the Juvenile Court system. If the case could be diverted then FD would not have to appear before a Judge and she would never be arraigned on the charge and, most importantly, NO entry would be made on her record. On Tuesday, November 4, 201 FD, her parents, and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lawrence Juvenile Court for a hearing before the Clerk-Magistrate. Attorney Lewin was able to get the police to agree to diversion of the case. The Clerk-Magistrate listened to Attorney Lewin and agreed that notwithstanding the seriousness of what FD had done she was an appropriate candidate for diversion and the Magistrate ordered diversion. As a result FD will have no record.
27 YEAR OLD WARRANT CLEARED IN HOURS
SR is 47 years old and lives in Colorado. SR applied for a gun permit but was denied on the grounds that he had a warrant in Massachusetts that dated back to 1987. The warrant was for a misdemeanor charge of unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in Lawrence District Court. SR called the court and was told that he had to come out to Massachusetts to clear the warrant or he could try getting a local lawyer to help. SR called Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover, MA. SR retained Attorney Lewin late in the afternoon on Thursday, November 6, 2014. Attorney Lewin interviewed SR by phone on Thursday evening and on Friday, November 7, 2014, Attorney Lewin went over to Lawrence District Court and had SR’s 1987 case put on the court list for that day. Attorney Lewin spoke with an Assistant District Attorney and the Asst. DA agreed to dismiss the case. The case was called and the Judge ordered the warrant cancelled and the case dismissed. Attorney Lewin then obtained attested copies of the Notice of Warrant Cancellation and the Court Docket Sheet (showing that the case was dismissed) and sent them out to SR in Colorado so that he could now get his gun permit. Within two hours after court opened this problem was solved.
ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGE – NO PROBABLE CAUSE
On September 16, 2014, GN, a 57 year old man from Wilmington, was accused of assaulting a female neighbor. The neighbor’s 11 year old son had been playing ball in the street in front of GN’s house; the boy claimed that the ball went under the bushes directly in front of GN’s house and that before the boy could retrieve the ball GN came out of the house, picked the ball up, and put it in his pocket. The boy went home and told his mother. The mother came down to GN’s house and rang the bell. GN came to the door and the neighbor demanded that he return the ball. GN denied that he had the ball and said he did not know what she was talking about. The neighbor walked away from the door and as she walked down the driveway she grabbed GN’s granddaughter’s tricycle and shouted to GN you’ll get the trike back when I get the ball back.GN bolted from the front door and according to the neighbor grabbed the tricycle and then shoved her. The neighbor called the police and the police responded. GN denied shoving the neighbor; he admitted to grabbing the tricycle. The neighbor applied for a criminal complaint against GN and GN received a notice of a complaint hearing from Woburn District Court. GN retained Attorney Robert Lewin. Attorney Lewin immediately advised GN to apply for a criminal complaint against the neighbor for larceny (stealing the tricycle) in order to “level the playing field”. GN followed Attorney Lewin’s advice. The Clerk-Magistrate at Woburn District Court sent the neighbor a notice for a hearing against her for larceny. The two hearings were scheduled for the same time. In Massachusetts a person has a right to use reasonable, non-deadly, force to protect their property and to prevent it from being stolen. On October 24, 2019 the hearing took place. The Clerk-Magistrate heard both sides. Attorney Lewin had photos of the scene and had GN, his wife, and his daughter testify. Attorney Lewin had made a copy of the relevant law (that a person has right to use reasonable, non deadly, force to prevent their property from being stolen) for the Clerk-Magistrate. The Clerk-Magistrate found no probable cause to issue a criminal complaint against GN. GN walked out of Woburn Court having no criminal record and no criminal complaint to defend against.
DRUG DISTRIBUTION CHARGES DISMISSED
On September 26, 2014 BQ, was driving from Western Massachusetts back to her home in Cambridge.She was transporting a substantial quantity of mushrooms (a Class C controlled substance) and marijuana (a Class D controlled substance). As she drove down Route 2 in Concord a local police officer ran her plate and determined that the car did not have a current inspection sticker. The officer pulled BQ over and approached the car. The officer immediately smelled “an overwhelming odor of raw marijuana coming from the vehicle”. The officer asked BQ where the marijuana was in the car and she said there was none. The officer told her that the car reaked of marijuana and BQ again said there was none.The officer ordered BQ out of the car and had her perform field sobriety tests – which she passed without hesitation.The officer told BQ that he would then search her car; BQ protested saying she did NOT consent to any search of the car. The officer went ahead with the search and seized large quantites of mushrooms and marijuana from the car. BQ was arrested and charged with Possession with Intent to Distribute Mushrooms (Class C), Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana (Class D), Possession Class C, Possession Class D, and No Inspection Sticker.
BQ retained Attorney Robert Lewin. It became immediately apparent to Attorney Lewin that the search of the car was unlawful and that ALL the evidence that the police seized (including all the drugs) would have to be suppressed. On July 9, 2014 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Cort ruled that the smell of unburnt marijuana is not enough to justify the search of a motor vehicle.
Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the District Attorney’s Office at Concord District Court. To her credit, the Assistant District Attorney agreed with Attorney Lewin and agreed that the evidence would be suppressed and that the Commonwealth would not be able to go ahead with the charges. On October 29, 2014 BQ and Attorney Lewin appeared in Concord District Court. All of the charges were DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT. As a result of this disposition the cases did not go on BQ’s criminal record and she has no record. At Attorney Lewin’s request the police returned BQ’s backpack and the cash they seized from her at the time of her arrest. The drugs got destroyed! Every week, the decisions of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and the Massachusetts Appeals Court are published and every week since he became a lawyer in November of 1971 Attorney Lewin has read the decisions. His ready knowledge of the law helped BQ avoid from having a felony charge on her record. BQ left the courthouse absolutely thrilled with the result in her case.
DOMESTIC ASSAULT & BATTERY (2nd Offense) DISMISSED IN LOWELL DISTRICT COURT
On July 14, 2014, JC, a 46 year old housewife from Tewksbury got drunk. When her husband got home from work she attacked him ripping his shirt off and throwing things at him. He called 911. The police responded. Photographs were taken by the police of the husband and of his torn shirt. JC was arrested. This was her second arrest for assaulting her husband. In 2013 she had been arrested and charged with domestic assault & battery by means of a dangerous weapon. In the 2013 case JC retained Attorney Robert Lewin and Attorney Lewin was successful in getting that case dismissed. Following her arrest she was brought to the Tewksbury Police Station; she was booked and held for court. JC again retained Attorney Robert Lewin. JC was arraigned and released and her case continued for a pre-trial hearing. Attorney Lewin met with JC’s husband and he agreed to exercise his marital privilege. In Massachusetts a spouse (husband or wife) may refuse to testify against their spouse at a criminal trial. The marital privilege only applies to testifying at a criminal trial. JC and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lowell District Court for the pre-trial hearing. JC’s husband was present at the pre-trial hearing and was prepared to exercise his marital privilege at the pre-trial hearing. The Judge ruled that the privilege could only be exercised at the trial and the case was continued to October 3, 2014 for trial.
On October 3, 2014 JC and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lowell District Court; the case was called and Attorney Lewin answered ready for trial. JC’s husband was present and was called forward. He exercised his marital privilege and the privilege was accepted by the trial judge (who happened to be the same judge who had refused to accept the privilege at the pre-trial hearing). The Assistant District Attorney stated that without the husband’s testimony the Commonwealth did not have sufficient evidence to prosecute the case and the case was dismissed. In this case there was a recording of the 911 call made by JC’s husband to the Tewksbury Police Department. In that recording the husband tells the police that he had been attacked by his wife, that she had ripped his shirt off, and that this had happened before. Normally speaking, 911 recordings are not admissible; they are hearsay evidence. One of the exceptions to the hearsay rule is that if the 911 call contains an excited utterance or if the statements made to the police are made for the purpose of quelling an ongoing emergency situation or for the purpose of determining if a person is in need of medical care then the contents of the 911 call are admissible at trial and can be used as evidence against the accused. Attorney Lewin prepared a lengthy and detailed Motion to Exclude the contents of the 911 Recording. The District Attorney agreed with Attorney Lewin’s analysis of the law and thus the Commonwealth did not go forward with the trial. JC was very fortunate that her husband did not want to go forward and she was fortunate that Attorney Lewin was able to convince the DA that the contents of the 911 call would not be admitted at trial; for the second time she walked out of the Lowell District Courthouse a free woman.
SHOPLIFITNG CHARGE AVOIDED
On August 27, 2014, EG, a 58 year old married mother of two children went into the Whole Foods Market in Andover. She filled her shopping cart with about $150.00 worth of food; unfortunately she filled her pocketbook with about $130.00 worth of vitamins. She went through the cash register and paid for the food but did not pay for the vitamins. As she exited the store she was stopped by a loss prevention officer. She was brought back into the store; the vitamins were removed from her pocketbook. The Andover Police were requested by the store and they responded. The Andover Police did not arrest EG but they took her information and told her she would be hearing from the Lawrence District Court. EG is a dental hygienist and she was concerned with the potential effects of having a criminal record. EG retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover.
Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Police Prosecutor from Andover and obtained a copy of the police report. In addition Attorney Lewin made sure that the case was being set up for a Hearing before a Clerk-Magistrate as opposed to a summons. When a person is accused of shoplifting and the amount in question exceeds $100 the police have two choices. They can file an application for criminal complaint at the Court and request that the Clerk-Magistrate set the application up for a hearing to determine whether or not a criminal complaint will be issued against the accused. The second choice the police have is to file the application for criminal complaint at the court and request that the Clerk-Magistrate issue the criminal complaint without a hearing and issue a summons for the accused to appear before a judge. This is a critical difference. When the application is set up for a hearing then the accused has the opportunity to “kill” the case before it goes any further. When the Clerk-Magistrate conducts a hearing, the Clerk-Magistrate has the discretion to NOT issue the criminal complaint against the accused. If the Clerk-Magistrate does NOT issue a criminal complaint then the accused does not have to go in front of a Judge and, more importantly, NO criminal record is created. There is no publicity of the charge.
On the other hand, if the Clerk-Magistrate decides to by-pass a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing and issues the complaint and a summons then the accused loses that opportunity to “kill” the case, the accused has to appear before a judge for an arraignment in open criminal court, and a CRIMINAL RECORD is created. That is why it is important to advocate with the police at the earliest possible moment to have the case set up for a hearing.
DOMESTIC (FATHER/SON) ASSAULT & BATTERY DISMISSED
On July 19, 2014 SI, a 46 year old letter carrier from Malden, asked his 16 year old son to get ready for bed. SI and his son got into an argument. The son told SI to go f__k himself. The son alleged that SI then struck the son across the forehead pushing the son into the wall. SI’s wife got between the two of them. SI’s daughter called 911. SI left the house. The police responded. The police took statements from SI’s son, daughter, and wife. The police applied for a criminal complaint against SI for assault & battery. The police also notified DCF (the Department of Children & Families); DCF came to the house and took statements from everyone, including SI. SI denied striking his son in the forehead. DCF was told that the son (who was 2″ taller than his father and 20 pounds heavier) got up in his father’s face and was screaming at his father. SI put his open palms against the son’s chest and simply pushed the son back from SI’s face. The DCF decided to UNsupport the allegation of abuse that had been made against SI. SI retained Attorney Robert Lewin to represent him at the hearing on the criminal complaint.
Prior to the hearing Attorney Lewin met face to face with the Malden Police Prosecutor. Attorney Lewin gave the police prosecutor a copy of the decision from the Department of Children & Families showing their determination NOT to support an allegation of abuse. In addition Attorney Lewin gave the police prosecutor a copy of a statement Attorney Lewin had taken from SI’s wife wherein she corroborated SI’s version of what had occurred. On September 16, 2014 Attorney Lewin, SI and SI’s wife appeared at Malden District Court for the hearing. Attorney Lewin had SI’s wife testify. After hearing the testimony of SI’s wife the Clerk-Magistrate DISMISSED the application for criminal complaint. As a result of this disposition SI was not charged with a criminal offense, no criminal complaint was issued against him, he was not arrested, and no criminal record was created. It was as if it did not happen. SI and his wife left the court pleased with the outcome of the case.
As in most criminal cases, preparation and communication are most important. Attorney Lewin had both SI and his wife prepared for the court hearing. Attorney Lewin had communicated fully with the Police Prosecutor before the hearing. “All the ducks were lined up” before SI and Attorney Lewin walked into the hearing room.
CRIMINAL HARASSMENT CHARGE DISMISSED
For 25 years RJ had a secret love for CL, a woman RJ had worked with for 4 years from 1989 to 1993. RJ was very very shy and never asked CL out on a date and never told her of his affections for her. For 25 years RJ “kept tabs” on CL, knowing where she worked and where she lived. He would go for walks near her home always hoping to catch sight of her. He would go for walks near her workplace hoping to see her. In 2013 he would drive to her neighborhood, get out of his car, and go for walks when he knew she would be out. He would walk on the opposite side of the street. On occasion he would walk past her – never saying anything to her. CL began to notice this man showing up near her place of work and near her home and following her (not realizing who he was). She became alarmed and notified the police. CL’s neighbors also noticed the man and the neighbors became concerned. Someone got his license plate and gave it to the Billerica police. The Billerica police contacted RJ and had him come to the police station. He immediately confessed to 25 years of following CL. The police charged RJ with criminal harassment and the case was set up for a Clerk’s Hearing in Lowell District Court on February 14, 2014. RJ retained Attorney Robert Lewin of North Andover. Attorney Lewin realized that RJ was a very shy and simple man. He had no intention to harm or frighten CL. Prior to the hearing Attorney Lewin had spoken to both the police prosecutor and the officer in charge of the investigation. Attorney Lewin was able to convince the police that RJ had no intentions to harm or cause hardship to CL. On February 14, 2014 RJ and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court for the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin explained the case in detail to the Clerk. The Clerk-Magistrate agreed with Attorney Lewin that this was an appropriate case not to issue a criminal complaint. The Clerk-Magistrate continued the hearing for six months to August 14, 2014. On August 14, 2014 the application for criminal complaint was DISMISSED. As a result of this disposition RJ was not arrested, he was not charged, no criminal complaint was issued against him, and no criminal record was created. It was as if it did not happen. The solution to this case was in the preparation and the communication. Attorney Lewin communicated directly with both the Police Prosecutor and the Investigating Officer well before the hearing and got them to agree for the Magistrate not to issue the complaint.
FIVE 30 YEAR OLD WARRANTS CANCELLED
In 1983 and 1984 WL, then 23 and 24 years old got into a spate of trouble with the Haverhill Police. He had charges of Violating Probation on an Operating Under the Influence of Liquor charge, Malicious Destruction of Property (a Felony), two charges of Operating an Uninsured Motor Vehicle, and a charge of Attaching Plates to Conceal a Vehicle. It all became too much so WL headed out west to California for greener pastures. Months turned into years and years turned into decades. In 2014, WL, now 53 years old, is living in Pennsylvania and he went to renew his Pennsylvania gun license. He was told he could not renew his gun license because he had these warrants in Haverhill District Court. WL first hired a Massachusetts lawyer who does gun license cases. When the lawyer saw the situation in Haverhill District Court, the lawyer told WL you need to get a lawyer who knows the Haverhill District Court and who has experience in getting old cases cleaned up. On Wednesday, September 10, WL contacted Attorney Robert Lewin in North Andover, MA. They talked on the phone and then WL retained Attorney Lewin (paying the legal fee by wire transfer). Later that day Attorney Lewin went to Haverhill District Court, reviewed all the papers, and spoke directly to the Probation Department. On the DUI case WL had been put on probation back in 1984 but he utterly failed to comply with his probation. He did not do the DUI Program and he had not paid the court fees and fines. The one big thing that WL did have going for him was that for the last 30 years he had not got into any trouble. Attorney Lewin was able to convince the Probation not to ask that WL’s probation be revoked. On Friday, September 12, 2014, WL flew out to Boston and met Attorney Lewin at Haverhill District Court. Attorney Lewin and WL went in front of the Judge. Attorney Lewin explained to the Judge that over the last 30 years WL had gone on to become a productive citizen, that he had his own business, that he was raising two children, and most importantly that WL had stayed out of trouble. The Judge was impressed with WL’s progress over the last 30 years and agreed to dismiss the probation violation. The Judge then dismissed all five cases against WL and ordered WL to pay a total of $1,000 in court costs. WL paid the $1,000 immediately before anyone changed their mind. Within 48 hours of retaining Attorney Lewin all five of WL’s cases in Haverhill District Court were dismissed. WL was thrilled and flew back to Pennsylvania to get his gun license. Had the Probation Office asked for WL’s probation to be revoked and had the Judge revoked his probation, WL could have been sentenced to up to 2 1/2 years in jail and his right to drive would have been revoked for one year (and Pennsylvania would have revoked his Pennsylvania driver’s license for the one year period). He had a lot at stake and it worked out well. WL gave Attorney Lewin a big thank you and handshake as they left the Courthouse.
UNLICENSED OPERATOR CHARGE DISMISSED
On February 16, 2014 TF was operating a Caterpillar Front End Loader doing snow removal on Rt. 93 South in Woburn. It was 2:00 am and it was snowing hard. A car came onto Rt. 93 and was going too fast for the conditions and crashed into the Front End Loader. The State Police responded to the scene. When asked for his license TF told the police that his license (a Vermont License) was back at the shop. The police ran his license information and learned that TF was suspended in Vermont and had been denied a license in MA. The police charged TF with unlicensed operation, license class violation, and no license in possession. It turns out that TF’s license in Vermont had been suspended for his failure to complete a DUI Program. He was completely unlicensed in MA. TF retained Attorney Robert Lewin. Attorney Lewin instructed TF to complete all his outstanding requirements to get reinstated in VT. On September 15, 2014 TF and Attorney Lewin appeared in Woburn District Court. After a productive meeting between Attorney Lewin and the Assistant District Attorney, the DA’s office agreed to dismiss all the charges against TF upon the payment of $150.00 in court costs. Attorney Lewin told TF to pay the costs immediately before someone changes their mind. TF paid the costs immediately and they case went completely away. TF left the Courthouse a happy fellow.