by

On June 20, 2020, MG, a 23 year old musician was driving northbound on Route 1 near the jug handle in Peabody. Suddenly he rear ended the vehicle in front of him which had come to a stop in traffic. The police responded to the accident scene and it was determined that MG’s license was suspended for non-payment of a speeding ticket. The police cited MG for operating after suspension (a criminal offense) and for  failure to use care (a civil offense).  MG’s driver record was not good. This was his second surchargeable (at fault) accident in less than a year and he also had an out-of-state conviction for using a hand held phone while driving.

MG received a summons to go to Peabody District Court. His arraignment was scheduled for July 13, 2021. On July 12, 2021 (!!!), the day before the scheduled arraignment, MG’s father contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover and asked if he could go to court the next morning. Attorney Lewin said he could rearrange his schedule and he could go to court in Peabody at 8:30 AM for MG’s arraignment. MG’s family hired Attorney Lewin late in the day on July 12. That evening, Attorney Lewin spoke with MG on the phone and took a complete statement of the facts from MG as well as a complete personal history. Attorney Lewin ran MG’s driver record from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. The next morning Attorney Lewin appeared with MG and his father in Peabody District Court. Fortunately MG had paid the speeding ticket that was causing his license to be suspended and he paid a reinstatement fee to the Registry so that when they went to Court on July 13, 2021 MG’s license was active.

Attorney Lewin spoke with the Assistant District Attorney at Peabody District Court and pointed out that MG had NO criminal record in MA and that his license was fully reinstated. Attorney Lewin asked the Assistant DA to dismiss the criminal case and the Assistant DA agreed.

Continue reading

by

MM, a 38 year old woman from Methuen had a 12 page criminal record with 32 separate offenses spanning 15 years. Her record included both felonies and misdemeanors. She worked as a phlebotomist but wanted to go to Nursing School to become an RN. She was concerned – rightfully – that her criminal record would cripple any chance she had of becoming a nurse and sought to get her record sealed.

In Massachusetts there are two ways to get criminal records sealed. Certain criminal records can be sealed administratively by simply submitting a Petition To Seal to the Commissioner of Probation in Boston. These Petitions do not require a court hearing and if all the time requirements are met these Petitions are allowed automatically. Other criminal records require submitting a Petition To Seal to the Court where the case was heard. These Petitions require a hearing before a Judge in Court and the Judge has discretion to either grant the Petition or deny the Petition.

MM’s criminal record began in 2001 and ended in 2015. Twenty-seven of the cases on her record met the timing (and other) requirements for administrative sealing. Five of the cases on her record (all felony charges) did not meet the requirements for administratively sealing and required a court hearing. These felony charges included Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, Malicious Destruction of Property, Conspiracy, Insurance Fraud, and Filing as False Motor Vehicle Claim. MM sought out a lawyer. MM met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately ran a copy of MM’s CORI (Criminal Record) and was able to determine which cases could be sealed administratively and which cases required a court hearing.

Continue reading

by

On Wednesday, July 28, 2021 Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover received a phone call from AL, a 48 year old gentleman from Florida. AL told Attorney Lewin that Florida had suspended his license because AL’s right to drive in Massachusetts was suspended due to a 29 year old warrant out of Gardner District Court. Attorney Lewin told Al that Attorney Lewin would call Gardner District Court to see what the warrant was all about. Attorney Lewin called the Court and learned that in 1992 AL had been arrested and charged with the following offenses in Gardner:

  • Operating After Suspension of his License
  • Giving a False Name to a Police Officer
Continue reading

by

Attorney Lewin’s string of successful defense of Operating After Suspension of License charges continued full steam ahead in August of 2021. Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court on August 4, 2021 and was successful in having two clients avoid being prosecuted for operating after suspension.

HZ’s Case

HZ’s case:  HZ is a 38 year old permanent resident alien from China living in Lowell. He has a Doctorate in Bio Medical Engineering and is employed as a principal research engineer at a bio-tech company. In 2019 Dr. Z got a ticket for a marked lanes violation and he failed to pay the ticket. As a result the Registry suspended his license. He claimed not to have received any notice of the suspension. On August 26, 2020 Dr. Z was operating his car on Route 495 in Chelmsford. Suddenly the car in front of him came to a stop and Dr. Z could not stop in time and rear ended the stopped car in front of him. The police responded to the scene and when they ran Dr. Z’s license it came back as suspended. The police issued Dr. Z a citation for Operating After Suspension of License and for Following too Closely (a civil violation). Dr. Z – to his credit – immediately went to the Registry and paid the outstanding ticket from 2019 and he paid a reinstatement fee and got his license reinstated. Dr. Z also sent the citation in to Lowell District Court to request a hearing. Because of covid-19 getting a hearing date was substantially delayed. Finally Dr. Z received a notice from Lowell District Court that his hearing on the State Police Application for a criminal complaint against him was scheduled for August 4, 2021. Dr. Z sought out a lawyer and met with (via zoom) and hired Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted Dr. Z’s insurance company to make certain that the person whose car Dr. Z rear ended had been paid for their property damage in full. Attorney Lewin obtained written confirmation from the insurance company of the payment in full. Attorney Lewin obtained a copy of the police report. Attorney Lewin also obtained written verification from the Registry that Dr. Z had paid the outstanding ticket from 2019 and that his license was fully reinstated by the Registry.

Continue reading

by

On May 4, 1991, AS, a 19 year old woman, went out on a date with a man in his twenties. AS picked the man up at work and they went out. He told her that he had a license and she allowed him to drive her car. The man was speeding and the police blue lights came on behind them. He pulled over and said to her “switch seats with me as I do not have a license”. They switched seats (which the police officer saw). The police came up to the car and asked the male for his license. He said he had not been driving. The police then looked at AS and she said he had been driving. The police had the man exit the vehicle and they arrested him for unlicensed operation (in fact his license had been suspended). The police issued AS a citation for “permitting an unlicensed person to operate her motor vehicle”. In Massachusetts it is a criminal offense to permit or allow a person who is not duly licensed to operate a motor vehicle.

AS took the citation but never requested a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. (Had she requested a hearing the case most likely would have been resolved without a criminal complaint issuing against her.) In any event, a summons was issued for AS to appear in Gloucester District Court for an arraignment on August 20, 2021. AS’s parents contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover and retained him

Attorney Lewin immediately obtained the police report and then contacted the DA’s Office. AS was working as a deli clerk at a supermarket and she was enrolled in college and she had no criminal record. It was important for AS to try to keep her record clean. A criminal record gets created when a person is arraigned on a criminal charge. Attorney Lewin pointed out all these factors to the Assistant District Attorney and advocated for the DA to agree to a dismissal of the case prior to arraignment. A Judge cannot order  a case dismissed prior to arraignment if the DA does not agree to it. As a result of Attorney Lewin’s advocacy, the DA agreed to dismiss the case prior to arraignment.

Continue reading

by

On April 5, 2019 ML was working as a bar tender at a hall in Haverhill. There was a mercy meal function and she had been called in to work the function. ML was a 49 year old single mother of two children.  During the course of the evening ML had occasion to go out to a storage hallway behind the bar to pick up an additional bottle of liquor for the bar. While in the back hallway a woman came out of the ladies room (which was located off the hallway) and handed a pocket book to ML. The lady told ML that she found the pocketbook in the ladies room. ML quickly glanced inside the pocketbook and then walked back into the area behind the bar and placed the pocketbook on a shelf under the bar next to her own pocketbook. All the above was captured on a security video in the hallway and behind the bar. At a later point in the evening ML can be seen (on the security video) bending down under the bar in the area where she had placed her own pocketbook and the pocketbook that had been handed to her. Later in the evening a woman at the mercy meal can be seen running around the hall and finally approaching the bar. The woman tells ML that she cannot find her pocketbook. ML is seen immediately getting the pocketbook and handing it to the woman. The lady looks inside the pocket book and yells that her $500 in cash for her rent was missing from the pocket book. The woman dials 911 and the police respond. The police speak to ML who denies stealing anything from the pocketbook.

The next day the police review all the security videos from the bar and charge ML with Larceny (stealing) of the $500 allegedly taken from the pocketbook.

ML then meets with and retains Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. ML and Attorney Lewin go to Haverhill District Court. ML – from day one – insisted to Attorney Lewin that ML was innocent. The case went through an arraignment, a pre-trial hearing, several discovery compliance dates (so that Attorney Lewin could get all the security videos), and ultimately was set down for a trial by jury on March 31, 2020. Then the covid 19 pandemic struck. It took a year and a half to finally get a new firm date for jury trial. The case was set down for trial on Monday, August 16, 2021. In the weeks leading up to the trial ML and Attorney Lewin prepared for the trial. Attorney Lewin prepared ML to testify in her own defense at the trial. At the same time Attorney Lewin “pestered” the DA’s Office to drop the case. On Friday morning, August 13, 2021, the Judge in Haverhill District Court had scheduled a “trial readiness conference” with the Assistant District Attorney and Attorney Lewin (on the phone). The Assistant District Attorney told the Judge and Attorney Lewin that the District Attorney was filing a “nolle prosequi”. A “nolle prosequi” is a termination of the prosecution of a criminal case by the Commonwealth. It is a dismissal of the case that is filed by the Commonwealth.

Continue reading

by

AW and BD met about six months ago and fell in love. AW moved in with BD and life was grand. AW had been in a prior relationship with MA and AW and MA had a son – who is now age 25! AW’s relationship with MA had been on and off over the last 25 years. AW ended his relationship with MA for good about 2 years ago. MA did not take well to the end of the relationship and began a pattern of texting AW and BD. She (MA) had the ability to make her text messages appear as if they were coming from a phone number that was not hers. The text messages became more frequent and more threatening. MA even went so far as to send a text to BD’s employer saying that BD was a terrible employee. BD had a high level job at a major hi tech company and said enough is enough. BD filed for a harassment prevention order in Lawrence District Court and sought out a lawyer to represent her at the hearing. BD met with and hired Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover to prosecute her complaint for protection from harassment against MA. BD and Attorney Lewin spent many hours gathering all the text messages that MA had sent and made copies (42 pages of text messages) in preparation for the hearing. Attorney Lewin met at length with BD and AW and prepared them for testifying at the hearing.

On March 31, 2021 BD and AW and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lawrence District Court for the hearing. MA was also present and she had an attorney with her as well. BD testified as did AW and Attorney Lewin presented in evidence all the text messages and through the text of the messages themselves Attorney Lewin was able to establish that the messages had come from MA. MA herself testified and denied sending the messages. Attorney Lewin had obtained an affidavit that MA had signed in Peabody District Court. Her statements in that Affidavit directly contradicted her testimony in Lawrence District Court. The Judge in Lawrence District Court granted BD’s complaint for an Harassment Protection Order and stated from the bench at the end of the hearing that she found that MA had committed perjury. (That was win#1.)

Having lost in Lawrence District Court, MA went to Peabody District Court immediately after the hearing in Lawrence and filed for an Harassment Prevention Order against BD and for an Abuse Prevention Order against AW. “Hell hath no fury ….” BD and AW were served with notices of the complaints against them and they both  retained Attorney Lewin to defend them against the orders in Peabody District Court.

Continue reading

by

MT, is a building and roofing contractor. He is now (April of 2021) age 57.

  • In 1994 he took a $5,350.00 deposit from a customer in Andover, MA but did not do the work. He was charged by the police with Grand Larceny. In 1994 he went to Lawrence District Court, was found guilty, and was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $5,350.00. He failed to make the payment and a default warrant issued for his arrest.
  • In 2015 he took a $4,000.00 deposit from a couple in Chelmsford, MA but did not do the work. The police charged him with Grand Larceny and a straight warrant for his arrest was issued by Lowell District Court. (A straight warrant simply means the court did not summons him; rather than a summons the court issued a “straight” warrant.)
Continue reading

by

On October 8, 2020, RK, a 25 year old software engineer for a communications company from New York City, was travelling from NY to Boston. She had a learner’s permit from NY. The car she was driving had a temporary paper plate that had folded over on itself so that the full plate# was not visible. A State Trooper signaled for her to  pull over on Route 84 and she pulled into a rest area and stopped. She had a male passenger in the car and he had no license. The trooper asked her for her license and she produced her NY State learner’s permit. The Trooper told her and the passenger to exit the vehicle. The Trooper, perhaps suspecting that she was transporting drugs, then completely searched the car including the trunk and the glove compartment – finding nothing. The Trooper said the car would have to be towed and she and her passenger would have to make arrangements to get picked up. The Trooper cited her for Unlicensed Operation (a criminal offense) and for a Number Plate Violation (failure to properly display). RK took the citation and completed the citation and mailed it in to the Dudley District Court to request a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing.

RK has a good job in a good profession and is very upwardly mobile. She absolutely did not want to have any criminal record. RK consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained to RK that getting her NY license would be very helpful to getting the case favorably resolved. RK signed up for her driving test in NY. Her driving test was set for April 1, 2021. Her court hearing on the ticket was set for April 8, 2021,

On April 1, 2021 RK was set to take her driving test; however, due to the covid-19 pandemic the DMV was not giving any road tests and her road test was cancelled.

Continue reading

by

On Friday, August 21, 2020 two 18 year old twins got caught shoplifting at Walmart in Tewksbury. The police were called to the store and the twins were arrested. They were bailed from the Tewksbury Police station and told to appear in Lowell District Court on Monday, August 24, 2020. Over that weekend the twins met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained that the twins would qualify for the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Young Adult diversion program. The program essentially allows young adults to avoid prosecution for certain criminal offenses.

Over that weekend Attorney Lewin prepared a Motion to Divert the cases out of the criminal court system. On Monday, August 24, 2020 the twins and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court. At Attorney Lewin’s request neither girl was arraigned. This is important because it is the taking place of the arraignment that creates a criminal record. Instead the cases were referred to the diversion program and the cases were continued to October 8, 2020 to see if the Diversion Program would accept the twins.  On October 8, 2020 everyone appeared virtually (the twins had gone off to college and were away from Lowell) and the Assistant District Attorney and Attorney Lewin reported to the Judge that the twins had been accepted into the Diversion Program. On October 8, 2020 the arraignment again did not take place and the cases were continued until April 5, 2021 to allow the twins to complete the diversion program.

The twins successfully completed the diversion program. On April 5, 2021 the twins and Attorney Lewin appeared virtually one last time before the Court. The Assistant District Attorney and Attorney Lewin reported to the Judge that both young women had successfully completed the Diversion Program. The Judge then ordered both cases DISMISSED, prior to arraignment. Attorney Lewin explained to the two young women that because the cases were dismissed prior to any arraignment taking place the following took place:

Continue reading
Contact Information
18 Kathleen Dr
Andover, MA 01810
Phone: 978-258-3520
Fax: 978-258-4565
E-mail Us
Map & Directions

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 © 2016 – 2024, Lewin & Lewin
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design