Recent Cases

SECOND OFFENSE DWI provided 1st OFFENSE DISPOSITION.

October 25th 2018
Waltham District Court

SECOND OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08% Chapter 90 Section 24(1) (a) (1)  
Open Container Chapter 90 Section 24L
Marked Lanes Violation, Chapter 89, Section 4A
 

Client, was a world-class martial artist, dad and otherwise responsible citizen. According to the police, the client was driving erratically when a citizen called the police to investigate. When police arrived, they found client was operating his vehicle and in possession of an open bottle of brandy. The client agreed to a breathalyzer test and blew a .26 which is three times the legal limit. The Commonwealth sought a six-month suspended sentence and two-year loss of license. In addition, they requested a two-week impatient program. Attorney Barabino sought a first offense which the law allows, if the prior offense was more than ten years as was the case.  Attorney Barabino provided a memorandum to the court outlining the clients unquiet and distinctive career path.  In the end, the court agreed with Attorney Barabino for a 1st offense disposition. So, he received a guilty conviction, but as a first offender. The result will be he will be allowed to request a hardship license before the registry at a sooner date and support his family while maintaining safety and sobriety for the him and the community in general. Also, client does not have to attend the two-week impatient program.

RESULT: 2nd OFFENSE provided 1st OFFENSE DISPOSITION.

RESULT: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED, with Exception of OUI Charge

October 24th 2018
Lawrence District Court

FIRST OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08% Chapter 90 Section 24(1) (a) (1) 
Disorderly Conduct Chapter 272 Section 53
Resisting Arrest Chapter 268 Section 32B
Open Container Chapter 90 Section 24L
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle Chapter 90 Section 24(2)(a)
Registration Suspended, Operation Chapter 90 Section 32 
Uninsured Motor Vehicle Chapter 90 Section 34J
Possession of Class B Drugs, Chapter 94C, Section 32A
Speeding, Chapter 90, Section 17A
Malicious Destruction of Property, Chapter 266, Section 127 

Client, a hard-working mother was charged with many criminal and civil offenses. According to State Police report, client was driving over 100 miles in hour on the highway. She was stopped, she came beligerent and taken to the ground by the officer. The officer arrested her due to her intoxication. he inventoried the vehicle after her arrest and located amphetimines pills that she did not have a prescription and he also located a bottle of alcohol. Once at the station, the client flooded the jail cell. This was a case resolved with every charge dismissed, and client being placed on probation for the OUI, enter the standard program, a drug evaluation and aftercare if necessary, an apology letter to the officer and a Brains at Risk half-day program.

RESULT: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED, with Exception of OUI Charge

CHARGES DISMISSED

October 17th 2018
Haverhill District Court

Assault and Battery 265 Section 13M(a)
Intimidation of a Witness Chapter 268 Section 13B 

Client, a young hard-working union carpenter who had a marital dispute that led to his arrest. The details are varied, but it is fair to say that a long-night of entertaining and alcohol led to an argument, to a physical interaction and client eventually receiving an injury.  The Police charged client will Assault and Battery and Intimidation of a witness (A felony). After discussion with the District Attorney and all involved it was agreed that a marital privilege which is a brief evidentiary hearing excluding a married spouse from testifying in a criminal case. The result was a DISMISSAL of all the charges.

RESULT: DISMISSAL OF BOTH CHARGES

CHARGE(s) DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL/Probation Extended

CHARGE DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL.

October 16th 2018
Salem District Court
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order Chapter 209 Section 7 
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order Chapter 209 Section 7 
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order Chapter 209 Section 7 
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order Chapter 209 Section 7 

Client was a particularly pleasant father who had tumultuous relationship with his former wife. The client was charged with three separate complaints of violation a restraining order. All the charges were questionable but a conviction on any was sure to result in his incarceration.  The charges were concerning for the court since the client was on probation for assaulting and beating his ex-wife already--a plea that he entered with another attorney. In the end, client and attorney Barabino requested a trial and at the day of trial, the District Attorney offered a deal which client felt was simply too good decline and accepted the deal. No additional jail and three of four charges dismissed.

RESULT: Three of the Four Charges DISMISSED; Fourth Charge agree to NO JAIL and Extended Probation for 6 months.

RESULT: CHARGE DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL.

September 26th 2018
Woburn District Court
Assault and Battery  265 Section 13M(a)

Client, a young hard-working builder was accused by his girlfriend of assault and battery. The charges were weak and a product of her serious mental illness. Although serious mental illness doesn't mean your allegations are untrue, it can cause people to act irrationally and aggressive and this was one such case.  She jumped on his bed while sleeping and threatened to break his television. And he simply refused to engage her hysterics. However, when police came to the house they saw her in bare feet and arrested him, as they assumed, according to the report, that given that she was in bare feet in 35 degree weather and the statements that client was likely the aggressor and he was charged. Attorney Barabino and client confidently requested a trial date and at the trial she did not appear so the case was DISMISSED.  

RESULT: CHARGE DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL.

Class B Drug Possession, Civil Offenses, CASE DISMISSED/NOT RESPONSIBLE

September 18th 2018
Woburn District Court
Class B Drug Possession, Chapter 94C, Section 34
Child 8-12 Or Over  57 Inches Without Seat Belt, Chapter 90, Section 7AA
Child Under 8 Years And Under 58 Inches Without Carseat, Chapter 90, Section 7AA

Client, a young mother of four, was driving when her vehicle was stopped by police for suspicious activity. Police investigated vehicle and searched her person, ultimately finding contraband. Part of the contraband included one Percocet pill, without a valid prescription. Client was ultimately charged with Class B Drug Possession and two minor civil offenses. While the Commonwealth gave reasonable alternatives to avoid trial, Attorney Barabino and Client decided it would be in the best interest of Client to proceed with a jury trial instead. At trial, the state chemist was unavailable, so the case was consequently dismissed. Civil charges found "not responsible". 

RESULT: Civil Charges, NOT RESPONSIBLE, CASE DISMISSED at Jury Trial  

Two Counts of Indecent Assault and Battery, NOT GUILTY

September 13th 2018
Boston Municipal Court     
Indecent Assault & Battery Under 14 Chapter 265 Section 13B
Indecent Assault & Battery Under 14 Chapter 265 Section 13B

Client was long-time senior government manager for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Highly publicized accusations cost him nearly everything, with even the Governor of Massachusetts making his position on case known to the media. This was the second round of accusations against client of these charges. After three days of trial, 14 witnesses, exhibits, computer evidence, testimony, and the defendant taking the stand in his defense, client received a verdict of "not guilty" on both counts.     

RESULT: Both Counts, NOT GUILTY.

Operating Under the Influence of Drugs, Class E Drug Possession, Class B Drug Possession, MOTION TO SUPPRESS ALLOWED, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED

September 7th 2018
Salem District Court
Operating Under the Influence of Drugs, Chapter 90B, Section 8
Possession of Class E Drugs, Chapter 94C, Section 32D
Possession of Class B Drugs, Chapter 94C, Section 32A

Client, a truck driver by profession and a father of two, was charged with the above three drug-related criminal offenses. According to police and several witnesses, client was found in a parking lot one evening clearly under the influence of some unknown drug. Attorney Barabino litigated the case for over a year, gathering five expert witnesses and compiling medical records, video tapes, and other scientific evidence to aid client's defense. Attorney Barabino was also able to successfully challenge several statements made against client as well as a urine analysis taken by police upon client's arrest. In the end, the Commonwealth admitted to having insufficient evidence continue with its prosecution. All charges were subsequently dismissed. 

RESULT: MOTION TO SUPPRESS, ALLOWED, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED 

Larceny Under $1200, NO CHARGES FILED

September 6th 2018
Cambridge Juvenile Court  
Larceny Under $1200, Chapter 266, Section 30

Client, a pleasant young man from a good family, was charged with larceny when he was caught taking money over a period of time from his cash register at the supermarket he worked at. Unfortunately for the Defense, the evidence was strong that he in fact committed the alleged crime. Fortunately, thanks to the negotiation skills of Attorney Barabino and the cooperation of client, an agreement was reached with the Commonwealth that no charges would be filed, upon restitution of the stolen funds and a letter of apology from client. 

RESULT: NO CHARGES FILED, upon restitution and apology  

License Suspension Subsequent Offense, CASE DISMISSED

September 5th 2018
Salem District Court
License Suspension, Subsequent Offense, Chapter 169A, Section 8 

Client, a father of three, was charged with operating a motor vehicle on a suspended license, a subsequent offense. Client alleged that he did not know he was operating on a suspended license when he was arrested by police. While the Registry of Motor Vehicles claimed it sent client formal notice of the suspension, client stated that he did not receive such notice. The case went to trial. At trial the Commonwealth conceded that it could not prove the subsequent offense portion of the crime charged against Defendant. In the end, the case was dismissed upon payment by Defendant of $500.  

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED, upon payment of $500

sidebar_in_the_news

Contact Us

Fill out our online form