Recent Cases

May 7^th 2024
Shoplifting by Concealing Merchandise
Shoplifting over $250 by Concealing Merchandise
Shoplifting over $250 by Concealing Merchandise
Client was a pleasant young married woman with no criminal record. She went shopping to in a high-end cosmetics store and on three separate occasions she took item(s) that did not belong to her—stole them. On the third occasion she was confronted by security, which included a very brief physical touching. Security at this location had identified client before but had not apprehended her. On the last event, security reported to police and police inquired and tried to interview client and she denied the allegations. She was served with a summons to appear before a clerk magistrate and had two months to prepare for the hearing and that included, going to a therapist to review her behavior and remedy the underlying reasons for the theft (Often times, there is a depression, anxiety or anger that can cause someone to repeatedly take something when they can pay). We developed a long background memorandum on client, we also sent her to a online shoplifting course, and finally prepared to pay restitution. In the end, there was an agreement to not issue the complaint if she completed 25 hours community service as well—to which we embraced as the complaint does not go forward and still has no criminal history or record.
RESULT: Complaint Does Not go Forward to Arraignment.

April 19^th 2024
Assault and Battery with D/W
A&B Household Member
A&B Household Member
Client was a young man who, while in High School had some tension with his parents—very normal for most all teens. The young man had with equally pleasant parents. The police had responded to the home on more than one occasion as the disputes became concerning and criminal in nature. The parents acted when client was charged with a variety of offenses and child took responsibility for his actions. Client went through a variety of programs to include an out of state full time school with specialized instruction. The District Attorney office accepted him into a juvenile diversion program and monitored the efforts of the young man. Today, the case was dismissed prior to arraignment and the family moves forward, without the criminal charge.
RESULT: No Charge for Juvenile via Diversion

April 18^th 2024
Felony Assault and Battery
Client was an adult son living at home with his parents. Adult son was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon---a felony charge. According to police, they received a call and went to the home to investigate. Police stated that client had an argument with father and attempted to drive away striking father and striking a motor vehicle in the driveway. Father was transported to the hospital via ambulance. Police investigated and did not arrest but did send a summons to appear for the felony charge. Attorney Barabino spoke to the District Attorney and the result was that they would refer client to Diversion. Diversion reviewed the case and almost declined to accept it based on the facts as client had had a restraining order prior. However, they did accept client into Diversion, and he completed a variety of task to include therapy and anger management. As a result of his completion of these programs, today the case was dismissed pre-arraignment. The distinction with it being pre arraignment is that is never appears on the person criminal record—period.
RESULT: Felony Never Appear on any CORI Record via Diversion

March 20^th 2024
Domestic Assault and Battery (Household Member)
Client was pleasant hard-working union professional at casino with his girlfriend. This couple were enjoying themselves until they got into a petty dispute with each other. At the time they got into the petty dispute they were drinking alcohol and were intoxicated. This petty dispute resulted in client’s partner punching him in the face a couple times. Once client was punched in the face, he ran after girlfriend and aggressively tried to resolve the matter which resulted actions that were sufficient touching for the crime of assault and battery. Often, in most criminal offenses, there is not video evidence, but in this case, at this gambling location, there is military grade high resolution video that captures angles that are often not helpful to the defense, as was in this case. The prosecutor sought a guilty conviction with a period for 18-Months, Community Service, a 42-Week Intimate Partners Program and a stay away from the location. We presented an alternative a continuation of a finding instead of a guilty, no intimate partners program and no community service and also a lesser period of probation of a year. The Judge accepted the defendant’s plea with an agreement that he attend monthly counseling and agree not to drink as he recently became sober. Case will be dismissed in a year.
RESULT: Judge Accept Defendant’s Recommendation for Plea for Domestic Assault and Battery

March 14^th 2024
Leaving the Scene of an Accident with Personal Injury
Client was an all-around solid husband, father and respected employer. He was charged with leaving the scene of personal injury. This charge is similar to leaving the scene of property damage, yet with the added component that a person in that accident was somehow injured to some degree. The charge of leaving the scene of personal injury also has a higher penalty which is a 6-month minimum sentence if jail is imposed. So, the penalty is very high. Also, for people, like this client who have immigration applications pending, a guilty for this charge could lead to deportation as it is a charge involving, “moral turpitude”. Here in this case, the client had been backing up his truck when he hit a pedestrian walking. When he did he quickly stopped the vehicle and shared his telephone number and did all that he thought he could do to assist. And he didn’t hear anything until the next day he got a call from police that the people alleged that he stuck the woman and then fled; that was simply not true. Client quickly called Attorney Barabino and informed him to file the summons with the clerk within 4 days as that would allow a pre-hearing, otherwise known as a magistrate hearing. In the meantime, client went to the local business and obtained video from a nearby business which showed that he stayed much longer than alleged. In preparation for the magistrate hearing, Attorney Barabino prepared a memorandum of law for the charge, also an affidavit of client which showed, among other that the location was not an actual “public way” at that time of night, and lastly, a background memorandum which was supported by the video. At the hearing, the magistrate listened intently and simply declared that there was no probable cause. Here, client was innocent and that at the hearing he was proven so.
RESULT: No Charges of Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury.

March 4^th 2024
Firearm Carrying without a License
Possession of Large Capacity Feeding Device
Ammunition without ID Card
Possession of Large Capacity Firearm
Improper Storage
Client was a Marine Corp war veteran with no prior record. Client was solid classily guy who did not own any firearms. However, a family member that he lived with did. That family member had a firearm ID card, but that card was long expired. Family member was cleaning his firearm when it accidentally discharged, sending a bullet to another adjoining apartment. When it accidentally discharged it went through the floor into another apartment, but did not injure anyone, thankfully. Eventually, family member brought the firearm into clients truck that client owned—not family member. At the moment client sat in the truck, the police came to the scene. When police interviewed them, they were nervous and said deceptive statements which elevated the intensity of the police. Police received a search warrant for a variety of items. During the search warrant execution, the police found several hundred rounds of armor piercing ammunition, high-capacity magazines and two other firearms. They also located two high-capacity magazines that were in the drawer of client’s bedroom, which would fit inside the weapon that was discharged and located in the client’s truck. Also, inside the truck where the firearm and ammunition was located happened to have an old credit card and another old card, in clients name. When Attorney Barabino came into the case, client had in jail for several months. Attorney Barabino quickly assembled the evidence and material needed to appeal the district court detention so he could have him released. That petition was successful, and client was released with conditions. The case went on for over two years, with a variety of motions, hearings, and experts. Eventually, a trial date was scheduled and the District Attorney, after nearly two years determined that, yes, she would reduce the minimum mandatory 18 months committed in the house of correction to misdemeanor(s) and probation with no conditions—other than not to have dangerous weapons. Client was accepted the deal as it gave him the predictability he wanted with no jail, and no felonies.
RESULT: Minimum Mandatory Firearm Charge(s) reduced to Misdemeanors, no Jail.

February 21^th 2024
Liquor ID card, Misuse
Gaming Act, Wager under 21 Years of Age
Client was a young man with no criminal record. Client was under 21 and as someone under 21 he is not permitted to gamble at any casino, not enter the casino floor, and finally not able to drink alcohol. Client decided to go to a casino with two friends, one of the friends was over 21, however client and 2^nd friend were not. However, client was able to secure entrance to the casino with an identification (“ID”) that wasn’t his. This ID allowed client entrance to the casino. Once in the casino, client decided to try his hands at gambling. His brief attempt at gambling was unsuccessful and it was at that time that the Casino security intervened who were accompanied by the State Police. This casino, as most, has a highly sophisticated security system which includes video surveillance. And they were caught with little defense to their actions. The State police petitioned for a magistrate hearing. At the hearing, probable cause was established, but given a variety of factors, the state police and magistrate determined that this case should not go forward.
RESULT: Magistrate and State Police agree to NOT issue the Complaint, which means NO Record for this young man.

February 15^th 2024
Assault and Battery w/Dangerous Weapon
Strangulation or Suffocation
Strangulation or Suffocation, Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon, Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon, Pregnant Victim
Strangulation or Suffocation
Assault and Battery w/Dangerous Weapon
Assault and Battery Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery Pregnant Victim
Intimidation of a Witness
Strangulation or Suffocation, Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon, Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery Pregnant Victim
Strangulation or Suffocation, Pregnant Victim
Assault and Battery, Household Member
Reckless Endangerment of a Child
Client was a very decent hardworking educated married father. Client had a great reputation and was a particularly hard worker. He was in a relationship with a woman who was physically aggressive to him and he with her. Also, there was a child involved and immigrations challenges. Client would often memorialize when his spouse was aggressive and saved them on his phone. However, those contents and material was deleted presumably by someone who has access to his phone and was not recoverable. Also, the spouse had video of him striking her on various occasions and the video was not complementary. Also, the spouse was heavily involved in the prosecution of the case. The claims made was significant and at times questionable, however, she came armed with a trove of videos of physical aggression. Efforts at release from Detention and a detailed motion to dismiss, proved unsuccessful and trial preparation included 24 witnesses, 2-3 anticipated expert witnesses and a large variety of exhibits and testimony. On balance, the defendant weighed all the factors and agreed to lobby the matter with the judge to determine what he may give the defendant for a sentence if he admitted guilt. Attorney Arabino provided a detailed background sentencing memorandum and a video montage of supporting members of the public. The Government sought a prison sentence of 5-7 years. Attorney Barabino wanted much much less. In the end, the judge sentenced to 2 years house of correction, plus two more, plus probation. In the end, client agreed, and will be eligible for parole after two years. A difficult case where a young family and many lives, are forever changed.
RESULT: Client Not given 5–7-year, Prison Sentence Requested by Commonwealth, but a two year, plus two year, plus probation sentence.