Recent Cases

April 23^rd 2022
Reckless Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Clerk Magistrate Hearing
Super pleasant hard-working tradesman was charged with reckless operation of a motor vehicle and assault with a dangerous weapon, a felony in Massachusetts. According to police, someone was driving on the highway when they had words with another person who was driving in another car. That other person threw a can which struck the accuser in the chin and resulted in eight stitches. A serious criminal offense. Also, the accuser reviewed a lineup and picked out client, twice. In this case, we were confident that the crime occurred, but they had the wrong guy. Im cases like these you use everything you have available to show that the person was simply not the right one. When you have the truth on your side, things generally are made right, as they were here. Fortunately, the experienced State Trooper investigating these charges applied for a magistrate hearing and not a warrant, which allowed client, through Attorney Barabino, to present evidence demonstrating that his client was not the person who did this criminal act. No probable cause and no criminal record. Updated May 17th 2022: Attorney Barabino also represented client in getting rid of his immediate threat designation on his drivers license, after an appeal before the Board of Appeal, who authored a decision ordering reinstatement.
RESULT: NO Probable Cause, Charges DO NOT ISSUE

April 15, 2022
First Offense OUI
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
Client was a very pleasant, particularly patient, young payroll professional charged with a first offense OUI, Negligent Operation, and a Marked Lanes Violation. The case began like most cases do. Client was arrested and brought to court the next day. Since this was her first offense, she was released at the arraignment with an order not to drive. According to police, a motor vehicle accident occurred. Client was driving, someone hit her, and the other driver took off. Client crashed into a snow bank as a result. There was body camera footage from a police officer who responded. A body camera is a video recording attached to the body of a police officer. This type of footage is very useful because it demonstrates exactly what is happening at the scene. The footage revealed that client had likely had too much to drink before she took to the road. Additionally, there was also a breath test with results over the limit, Attorney Barabino and client consulted and decided to negotiate a plea. Thanks to these negotiations the Marked Lanes Violation was disposed “not responsible”—saving client a surcharge. Attorney Barabino also secured for client a dismissal on the negligent operation charge and a 24D disposition on the OUI. This is the lowest allowed by law. It is a CWOF with a 45-day loss of license which means if client completes her program the OUI will be dismissed. An agreement to also complete a Brains at Risk 1/2 day program as well.
RESULT: Negligent Operation DISMISSED; Civil Infraction Not Responsible; OUI Dismissed after Completion of 24D Program and 1 year Probation.

April 13, 2022
Larceny from a Person
Larceny Over $1200
Client was a very pleasant, very hard-working mother of four enjoying an evening of fun and relaxation at the local casino. She was charged with stealing a $5,000 casino chip from another player. Specifically, she was charged with felony larceny from a person and larceny over $1200.00, another felony. According to the police, she was playing with her friends which included doctor friend. That doctor friend was playing with large amounts of money which had been converted to casino chips. While he was gambling client gently slid one of the chips into her hands, she converted it to cash and at time was confronted by police. Based on the size of the theft she was handcuffed and booked and arraigned the next day in court. The case proceeded though the court system and various review of statements and more importantly video footage was analyzed. In the end, there was little defense, but to negotiate the matter which was something we had discussed with the Asst. Attorney General in the early stages. But given the confirmatory review of all the materials we were able to have one felony charge dismissed upon agreement and an admission of wrongdoing with an agreement that the case will be dismissed if no further trouble for a year and a letter of apology.
RESULT: ONE Felony DISMISSED, Another DISMISSED After YEAR.

April 11, 2022
Assault and Battery With a Dangerous Weapon on a Person Over 60
Assault and Battery w/Dangerous Weapon
Client was a very pleasant young woman impressive in every way. She was charged with two felony assault and battery crimes, both against her father. Client was in a unique position in life being in a wheelchair. In addition to her, client’s father was also charged with assault and battery against her. As a result, neither party wanted to testify. Usually when this happens cases have the possibility of being resolved with a mutual dismissal. Whereas both parties agree to not testify asserting what is commonly known as the 5^th Amendment Privilege. However, where there is other evidence—like 9-1-1- calls or body camera footage—sometimes the case can proceed anyway. Here though, the District Attorney chose not to go forward. Both sides asserted their Fifth Amendment right not to testify and the case was dismissed—helping bring the family back together.
RESULT: Charges Dismissed; No Criminal Record

April 1, 2022
First Offense OUI
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
Police ultimately met with client who was respectful, but had an overwhelming odor of alcohol. Client had slurred speech and glassy, bloodshot eyes. She told police that she had two glasses of wine prior to the stop but this proved to be modest. She had much more. Police then conducted Field Sobriety Tests. Client did not pass them. Then client took a Breath Test. She blew .219 and .207, about two and a half times the legal limit. After the event Attorney Barabino met with client without delay. He quickly and concerns and sprung right into preparing for arraignment. After client was arraigned, Attorney Barabino asked for and received a timely pretrial date. He began plea negotiations, right away with Attorney Barabino and his assistant began drafting a lengthy background memorandum on client’s outstanding character. This memo was put to use when negotiations with the respectable District Attorney’s office began and helped secure agreement to dismiss the negligent operation charge and findings of not responsible on the civil infraction. Thanks to Attorney Barabino’s negotiation skills he secured for client the most lenient sentence allowed by law for the OUI charge: a Continuance Without a Finding (QWOF) whereby the OUI would be dismissed after one year. Client also agreed to participate in a half day Brains at Risk Program, which was fair and reasonable under the circumstances. All-in-all, client’s high expectations were met and case was closed.
RESULT: Negligent Operation Dismissed; civil infraction Dismissed; most lenient sentence under law for OUI charge.

March 23^rd 2022
False Creation of a Sales Receipt
Very pleasant young man was accused of stealing over $10,000 from large corporate chain. The case began with client, while under particularly massive personal stress, taking advantage of his authority at a large chain store. Client was a young man, hard-working and industrious. He took on a large role for him family in their support, particularly financial. According to the Police, he developed an elaborate scheme to develop false sales receipt and in doing so took over $10,000 in product from the store. He was confronted by the security staff and admitted his role. The evidence was hard, if not impossible to refute. He had a lawyer for the clerk magistrate hearing, and it did not go well. He was given an arraignment date to be formally charged. During that time, he retained Attorney Barabino. Together, they developed a strategy to advocate for judicial diversion—pre-arraignment so that it would not appear on the record. A massive background packet was developed and in negotiation with the DA a deal was struck for DA diversion, which nearly identical to Attorney Barabino requests and provides everything he wanted for his client. After moving though diversion, which included restitution, he now returns to court today to have the matter dismissed, pre-arraignment, so, even the dismissal itself will not appear on his record.
RESULT: Case Disposed of Before it Even Started. No Record. At All

March 17^th 2022
Possession with Intent Class “C”
Possession with Intent Class “D”
Client was an all- around hardworking father and husband and small business owner. When the COVID-19 Pandemic hit he like many other small business owners struggled to survive. In this case, the well-intentioned owner used his business to transact marijuana and Class “C” drugs. Although legal in Massachusetts, one cannot sell it without a license which he did not possess. In this case, police arranged an to have an undercover officer make a buy at the location. They went into the client’s place of business and using marked bills purchased some items that are, illegal. They confronted client and client respectfully admitted that he has made the sales and made statements. Undercover drug purchases are difficult to defend since really the only defense is identification or that it wasn’t drugs. Here, the police surely made the correct identification, and the items were eventually certified from a Drug laboratory as, in fact the illegal drugs. Although the case took nearly a year to move through the court system, Attorney Barabino and client took advantage of the time to educate the District Attorney about client and his background. In the end, an agreement was that the case would be continued for a period of one year and client doesn’t admit to doing anything criminal. A great result, for a great person.
RESULT: PTP or Pre Trial Probation for Drug Distribution.

March 4th 2022
Possession of Child Pornography
Client was a hard-working professional who was charged with child pornography (CP). The client had had search warrants executed on his home for what was essentially all his electronic equipment. When the police arrived that day, they already knew what they wanted and why. In investigations such as these the specialized investigative teams had already done significant investigation and surveillance. The client was arrested and charged and held on one hundred-thousand-dollar bail ($100,000.00). That meant the client could not be released from jail until he provided the court with $100,000.00 which he didn’t have access too. Attorney Barabino went right to work interviewing client now held in jail conducting interviews with family members in his office. Armed with that information, Attorney Barabino began the process of trying to get his client out of jail with a lower bail. Attorney Barabino appealed the lower court’s decision and was successful after a hearing. The judge whom he appealed the case to reduced his bail to ten thousand ($10,000) dollars instead of $100,000.00. Defendant was released from jail. Once they were released from jail Attorney Barabino began the process of fighting his client’s case as aggressively as possible. The process of sorting through the material was aided by two separate experts hired by Attorney Barabino. One expert was a former State Police Officer who was hired for their expertise in computers and another expert was an experienced forensic psychiatrist. In there end, there was little alternative to plea the case, a plea was had before a judge. Client not sentenced to any jail time.
RESULT: No Jail for CP Charge.