Recent Cases

February 5^th 2024
Leaving the Scene of Property Damage
Client was hard working single professional. While enroute home from work he got into a car accident, a serious one where there was a high degree of property damage. After the accident, client left the scene and drove home in a panic. Client had no reason to leave the scene as he was insured and licensed—and had not consumed any drug or alcohol. In the end, he left, and he should not have. Shortly after the accident, client, who had driven home, now had the police at his door. He admitted his wrongdoing and the police officer provided him a summons. Client notified Attorney Barabino, who had client send in the summons to the Magistrate within the 4 Day limit. By sending the summons in by the 4-day limit, he is entitled to a clerk magistrate hearing to determine if the charges should issue. At the hearing, they presented materials in mitigation of issuing the charges, which included a summary of the restitution which was paid in full. In the end, due to a variety of factors, there was an agreement to NOT issue the complaint.
RESULT: Leaving the Scene Complaint Does Not ISSUE At Magistrate Hearing.

January 30^rd 2024
Assault and Battery
Client was a very kind decent law-abiding gentleman who, with one exception had never had problems with the law. On this occasion he was charged with assault and battery. Client had some friends over and according one friend, alleged that he struck her which resulted in a swollen lip. That person called police on a recorded line 911 line and stated her claims. Then police arrived as one would expect and assessed the situation. Apparently, there was a witness to client striking who affirmed the persons claims. Client had been defending himself but was arrested as is the normal course when police are in these situations. After several months, a review of the evidence and discussion with the District Attorney a trial viability date was held were all the people involved are summoned to court. This is something that is very preferable to the defense and it allows for cases to be often resolved favorability and predictability. In this case, the one witness appeared and discussed her recollection with the district attorney and her recollection was very favorable to the defense this time. At this point, the District Attorney agreed to stop the prosecution if client simply didn’t contact the complainant for 6 months. No plea, no admission of wrongdoing and no probation.
Result: Assault and Battery DISMISSED in 180 Days, No admission of wrongdoing or Guilt.

January 23^rd 2024
Violation of a Restraining Order
Client was all around class-act was charged with violation of a restraining order. He lived in Another state far away and violation was alleged to happen in Massachusetts. That means the case has to be in a Massachusetts court. The basis of the violation was a missed call on shortly after the protective order was received by client. There was an admission to making the call, but it was stated that it was done mistakenly. When a person does something mistakenly, there is a safety valve defense of “accident”. Another issue for the defense was the court requiring a person to appear at arraignment, hearings and trial causing a significant burden for client. Fortunately, Attorney Barabino had client’s presence waived at arraignment via motion in court—saving him a costly and unnecessary trip to Massachusetts. As the case proceeded, over nearly a year’s time, the complainant was insistent on the matter being fully pursued and that made making a deal with the Commonwealth challenging. Eventually, they scheduled the matter for trial where client had to appear in person. However, our witness was given previous permission to appear with a zoom for clients out of state witness. Eventually, on the day of jury trial, the Commonwealth recognized that they had a significant burden to achieve any guilty verdict and agreed to simply dismissed the case in its entirety. Case is Dismissed.
RESULT: Violation of Restraining Order is DISMISSED, At Trial.

January 17^th 2024
Threats to Commit a Crime
Client was an all-around super dad, husband, employee, and person. There was an incident at a store where the store employee believed that he was doing something untoward and tried to mediate and speak with the person. The person at the store became defensive and accusatory. Despite client trying to mediate the confusion, another store employee then made the same accusation of a threat as the co-worker. The police were called, and client explained to police as best as possible what occurred. In the end, the police filed for a magistrate hearing. Client went to the magistrate hearing alone without counsel and the complaint was issued. He called Attorney Barabino and they determined that he is eligible for considerationfor judicial diversion, however, they would have to persuade both the District Attorney and the court at his arraignment that he is a candidate and should be considered. They developed a petition and proposed a plan to engage in an online program for conflict resolution, was well as a therapist to review the incident and provide confirmation that the programming was successful. Client did both and today the charge was dismissed, pre-arraignment, meaning the charge never appears on any criminal record.
RESULT: Pre-Arraignment Dismissal on Threats Charge

January 17^th 2024
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Disorderly Conduct
Client was an all-around responsible and hardworking single dad. He was informed that by his less than responsible brother that he used his ID when being accused of a felony offense. Since brother wasn’t arrested on the scene, there was no fingerprints, booking photos and the like to ID the actual offender, which was client’s brother. Fortunately, client was notified of the impending court date and more importantly, client had a legitimate and credible alibi. Generally, in cases like this is it not uncommon to the district attorney to be sympathetic to the concerns but insist on the charges being pursued and resolved at trial or some other event. That is time-consuming, it would also mean an arraignment would occur thereby making an entry on the clients criminal record, even if dismissed, and also the uncertainty and stress on the client. In this case, Attorney Barabino and client met, developed an affidavit to support his alibi and supporting documentation and provided to the District Attorney prior to the actual arraignment. At the day of arraignment, the hard-working district Attorney made a judgment call that client was not the person in the criminal act and simply dismissed the matter, prior to the formal charges being brought in the arraignment.
RESULT: Pre-Arraignment Dismissal on Felony Charge

January 16^th 2024
Larceny under $1200
Magistrate Hearing
Client was an all-around amazing young lady who was accused of Larceny under $1200.00. The young lady had been and was a magnificent student and citizen. There was an accusation that she had been taking items that did not belong to her at the condominium that she lives. These accusations were inconsistent with her character and could derail her particularly bright future. After a review of the items that were alleged to be taken, there appeared to be legitimate defenses to the allegation, even at the magistrate level. As a result, Attorney Barabino took a dual approach to the strategy that 1) there was not probable cause to issue the complaint and 2) if the magistrate determined that probable cause exist, then there remains a justification to not issue the complaint based on a variety of factors and materials. In the end, the Police agreed that they would not issue the complaint and the magistrate concurred that this does not need to issue in fact did not issue.
RESULT: Magistrate Declines to Issue Complaint of Larceny.

December 20^th 2023
Assault and Battery on a Person over 60
Client was an all-around relaxed dad when he was charged with felony assault and battery on a person over 60, a felony charge. Although, dad is a responsible and relaxed person he admittingly lost his cool. He had been driving when the person in front of him was driving erratically and at one point cut him off. Client pulled in a confronted the gentleman and eventually pushed him to the ground. That act was viewed by several credible witnesses. One of those witnesses who saw the event came to the aid of the person and assaulted client via punching him on the face. Eventually, client simply left and was interviewed by police and given a summons to appear in court for his arraignment. After nearly a year, a disposition was agreed up by the district attorney whereas if client stays out of trouble for a year the case will be dismissed. Client also agrees to get anger-management as well.
RESULT: Continued without a Finding for a One-Year Period at which time it will be Dismissed.

November 29, 2023
Reckless Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Failure to Stop for Police
Speeding
Marked Lanes Violation
Immediate Threat Designation from the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV)
Client was a very pleasant, hard-working dad. On the day of the incident, he was late for work. While driving there, he was speeding. He also admittingly went over marked lanes of the road. Client was unaware that while he was speeding that there was a police car behind him. Then, when he went around the car over the marked lanes, the police decided to put on the emergency lights to affect a motor vehicle stop. However, Client was traveling at a speed that was excessive enough where the police didn’t feel comfortable stopping him. However, they did have his license plate and they did make a solid identification of client. Based on that they sent him a criminal summons for two driving charges, failure to stop for police, reckless operation of a motor vehicle, and two civil citations. The officer also made an immediate threat petition to the Registry of Motor Vehicles. This immediately suspends the license of that person until the case resolves, which in some instances can take up to a year from the date of offense. However, Client stood ready to do whatever he could to avoid the criminal charges on his criminal record and get his license reinstated at the earliest possibility. Days after the incident, Attorney Barabino went in person to the court to file his appearance for the case and request an early magistrate hearing. Given the immediate threat designation, this was allowed. Also, Attorney Barabino filed for a hearing at the Registry of Motor Vehicles soon after the scheduled criminal hearing—just in case he and Client were able to pursude the magistrate and officer that the charges should not issue. In the meantime, Client attended two driving classes and worked with Attorney Barabino on the hearing preparation. At the hearing, the magistrate found that the criminal charges were not supported by probable cause. Client would only have to pay the two civil citations. The RMV required three driving classes of which two were already done. Another RMV hearing occurred today, as client had done third school in the interim, and his license was reinstated.
RESULT: License reinstated (quickly) after immediate threat designation; no probable cause for criminal offenses found