Recent Cases

June 5, 2026
A&B Dangerous Weapon
Strangulation or Suffocation
Witness Intimidation
Vandalizing Property
A&B Household Member
Vandalizing Property
Our client was a devoted husband and father with no history of violence—especially not toward women. He did have one older drug-related conviction from years earlier that had resulted in a brief stint in state prison, but nothing remotely like this. Yet, he found himself facing serious domestic violence charges after an argument with his wife escalated in their building’s elevator. According to police, the elevator video showed him pushing her, kneeing her while she was on the ground, kicking her in the face, and smashing her phone. The alleged victim told officers he had also grabbed her by the throat and punched her several times. Police said she had visible bruising on her cheek, redness along her jaw, and marks on her neck, but she refused medical treatment and never requested a restraining order. He was arrested at home and placed on strict house arrest under a 58A dangerousness finding. The biggest challenge? The entire incident was captured on clear video footage, which would have been admissible in court regardless of what the alleged victim said on the witness stand. From the very beginning, our client was genuinely apologetic and remorseful. He took full responsibility and immediately began to turn things around. Working closely with Attorney Barabino, he completed a comprehensive diagnostic assessment for substance abuse and mental health, enrolled and finished an anger management program, and enrolled in an additional online rehabilitation course. We also submitted a detailed sentencing memorandum supported by strong character affidavits. Several factors worked in his favor: the district attorney and judge were fair and open-minded, and—most importantly—the court had already modified the dangerousness conditions before the final hearing to allow him back in contact with his wife. That showed real progress. The court continued the case without a finding for one year. Our client was ordered to complete a court-mandated program, with no GPS monitoring, no travel restrictions, and no criminal conviction on his record. The charges of strangulation or suffocation, witness intimidation, and vandalizing property were all dismissed. A difficult situation turned into a second chance—one our client is determined to make the most of for his family.
Result: The matter was continued without a finding for one year, with the client ordered to complete the court-mandated program.

May 28, 2026
Disorderly Conduct
Trespassing
Client, an established executive, was out at Encore Casino when an incident led to charges of disorderly conduct and trespassing. Like many otherwise responsible people, he had been drinking excessively and reacted poorly when confronted by security. When asked to leave, he became vocal and did not comply. He was arrested, booked at the police station, and given a date to return to court the following Monday. After connecting with Attorney Barabino, preparations began immediately. Attorney Barabino requested that the Assistant Attorney General not arraign the case, which would avoid creating a criminal record. The AAG agreed on the condition that the client complete eight hours of community service before the next court date. The client completed that obligation, and the case was dismissed before arraignment.
RESULT: Agreement and Brief Continuance Result in Pre-Arraignment Dismissal

May 28, 2026
Assault and Battery
Client, an otherwise relaxed software engineer, was charged with assault and battery after an altercation that began while he was driving with his girlfriend. According to the police, someone made a remark to him or his girlfriend, and he stopped the car, got out, and rushed toward the individual. The other person was larger and more agile, wrestled the client to the ground, and was injured in the process. Witnesses corroborated the accuser’s account, and the matter proceeded with active prosecution. Ultimately, the judge permitted judicial diversion with programming already in place, including therapeutic interventions and related conditions. Today, the case was dismissed consistent with the judge’s dismissal order.
RESULT: Case Dismissed with No Admission of Wrongdoing or Guilt

May 20, 2026
Assault
Client was charged with assault after originally facing assault and battery allegations at a magistrate hearing, where he represented himself and the assault charge issued. He later retained Attorney Barabino, who began working on the case after the hearing. According to the government, the client had a verbal dispute with another employee and threw iced coffee in that person’s direction. Although the charge was questionable, the alleged victim was actively involved in the case, and the client accepted a pretrial probation offer that required a short apology letter and a 4-hour anger management course. Under the agreement, if he is not arrested or charged with any new offenses for 180 days, the case will be dismissed without any admission of wrongdoing or guilt. Case closed.
RESULT: Resolved with No Record and No Admission of Guilt.

May 20, 2026
Magistrate Hearing
Shoplifting by Asportation over $250
Shoplifting by Asportation under $250
Shoplifting by Asportation over $250
Shoplifting by Asportation over $250
Shoplifting by Asportation over $250
The client was a seasoned college administrator, a responsible adult, and a mother. She was accused of taking items from a particular store on five separate occasions. The evidence against her was strong. We promptly obtained the report and secured a continuance of the scheduled hearing date. The client then began therapy and completed a background evaluation that included counseling sessions. She also paid the store’s civil demand in full and completed two online courses addressing her behavior. At the hearing, the magistrate and police agreed—reluctantly—not to issue the complaint, provided that the client paid the remaining amount through Attorney Barabino and completed 30 hours of community service. As a result, no complaint issued.
RESULT:

May 14, 2026
Magistrate Hearing
Assault
Client was a seasoned professional with no criminal history and no prior contact with the criminal justice system. On the morning in question, while hurrying to work, another vehicle stopped suddenly, nearly causing a collision. What followed was a brief but regrettable roadside exchange after the parties pulled alongside one another. Although the client denied key aspects of the allegation—including the claim that he used a racial slur—it was alleged that he tossed coins, some of which struck the other individual. The client did not attempt to justify his conduct. Instead, he acknowledged that he had been under extraordinary stress, exercised poor judgment in a fleeting moment, and responded in a manner wholly inconsistent with his character. Importantly, there was no police observation of the incident, and the matter proceeded by way of Clerk Magistrate Hearing only. That distinction proved critical. When charges were sought, the application was limited to Assault—not Assault and Battery, and certainly not Assault and Battery on a person over 60, a far more serious felony offense. More importantly, by the time of the hearing, the client had already taken meaningful and concrete steps toward accountability and rehabilitation. He completed multiple courses for self-improvement, and we presented those efforts directly to the court as evidence that this isolated event did not define him. The alleged victim also appeared at the hearing, and her position was measured and compassionate. She wanted the client to understand the seriousness of his behavior, and he did. He offered a sincere apology, which she accepted. Considering that apology, his evident remorse, his proactive rehabilitative efforts, and the absence of any prior record, the court declined to allow the case to proceed. The result was the just one: no complaint issued, no criminal record created, and no lasting professional harm imposed for conduct the client fully recognized was wrong and had taken genuine steps to address.
RESULT: PC Does NOT Issue Complaint. Career Saved Through Accountability, Preparation, and a Just Result.

May 14, 2026
Magistrate Hearing
Assault
Client was a seasoned professional with no criminal history and no prior contact with the criminal justice system. On the morning in question, while hurrying to work, another vehicle stopped suddenly, nearly causing a collision. What followed was a brief but regrettable roadside exchange after the parties pulled alongside one another. Although the client denied key aspects of the allegation—including the claim that he used a racial slur—it was alleged that he tossed coins, some of which struck the other individual. The client did not attempt to justify his conduct. Instead, he acknowledged that he had been under extraordinary stress, exercised poor judgment in a fleeting moment, and responded in a manner wholly inconsistent with his character. Importantly, there was no police observation of the incident, and the matter proceeded by way of Clerk Magistrate Hearing only. That distinction proved critical. When charges were sought, the application was limited to Assault—not Assault and Battery, and certainly not Assault and Battery on a person over 60, a far more serious felony offense. More importantly, by the time of the hearing, the client had already taken meaningful and concrete steps toward accountability and rehabilitation. He completed multiple courses for self-improvement, and we presented those efforts directly to the court as evidence that this isolated event did not define him. The alleged victim also appeared at the hearing, and her position was measured and compassionate. She wanted the client to understand the seriousness of his behavior, and he did. He offered a sincere apology, which she accepted. Considering that apology, his evident remorse, his proactive rehabilitative efforts, and the absence of any prior record, the court declined to allow the case to proceed. The result was the just one: no complaint issued, no criminal record created, and no lasting professional harm imposed for conduct the client fully recognized was wrong and had taken genuine steps to address.
RESULT: PC Does NOT Issue Complaint. Career Saved Through Accountability, Preparation, and a Just Result.

May 13, 2026
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Client was a young woman who was pulled over while driving. According to police she was driving at an excessive speed and passed over the yellow line to get around a slow operating vehicle. What the police allege was accurate in their description. Whether a someone’s driving is negligent is discretionary since the law is somewhat vague as to what constitutes negligent operation. Nonetheless, her operation was sufficient under the law for the criminal offense. The first thing Attorney Barabino had the client do was to provide the citation which she was given to the magistrate within the mandatory 4-day window. She quickly complied and she prepared with attorney Barabino for what would be the eventual magistrate hearing. In preparing for the hearing, she also attended a remedial driving course. At the hearing the magistrate and officer somewhat reluctantly decided that yes, they will not move the case for arraignment, which will ensure that her record remains fully clean and unblemished.
RESULT: Probable Cause, But does Not Issue. No Charge Issues. No Criminal Record.