Recent Cases

August 29, 2018
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Malicious Destruction of Property
Client was a respected business owner who, according to police, threw an object at a car causing permanent damage to the vehicle. After the incident, words were exchanged between client and accuser (owner of the vehicle). When police arrived, accuser cooperated with their investigation into the matter, and the defendant was subsequently charged with two felony counts of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon and Malicious Destruction of Property. Attorney Barabino was hired by client and gathered witnesses, photos, and other items and exhibits to offer an alternative explanation as to what happened for the clerk's consideration. In the end, an agreement was reached by all parties involved that client would pay the amount of damage caused to the car in exchange for a resolution of the case.
Result: NO APPLICATION FOR COMPLAINT TO ISSUE

August 23, 2018
Assault
Client was a hard-working father, husband, and employee. Objectively significant obstacles resulting in him disciplining his insubordinate daughter resulted in criminal charges of abuse. Shortly after the charge, Immigration and Naturalization took him into custody. His lawyer for his immigration case was able to secure his release from custody. Attorney Barabino worked with all involved, including the Department of Social Services and the District Attorney. In the end, the case will be dismissed with pre-trial probation, which is not probation at all. As long as he stays out of trouble for nine months, this case will be dismissed with no admission of guilt. Client maintains the presumption of innocence and his clean record.
Result: CONDITIONAL CASE DISMISSAL

August 2, 2018
Assault
Client was working his second job as a manager for a restaurant when a patron made repeated complaints. After trying to resolve the situation to the patron's satisfaction, the man (a lawyer), said he would tell his Twitter followers and began taking pictures. After being asked to leave, the patron complied and was escorted out by client. However, when the patron was just about to leave, he turned back around and bumped into the client and another patron. Police were immediately called. The patron declared that he would sue, and he was given a settlement by the owner of the restaurant to avoid the cost of litigation. In the end, Attorney Barabino came to the hearing with videotape, statements, witnesses and other exhibits. After a hearing, the complaint did not issue. It will remain open for six months, assuming no other concerns.
Result: Application for Complaint, DOES NOT ISSUE.

July 17, 2018
Animal Cruelty Chapter
Threats to Commit a Crime
Assault and Battery Chapter
Assault and Battery Chapter
Client was a young man who suffered from serious long-term mental health challenges. He admittedly committed an act of animal cruelty on his girlfriend's pet. In addition, he physically struck two people and made a threat of physical harm. Attorney Barabino got client released despite a Commonwealth request for custody. Client was released to a mental health hospital. After months and months of care and treatment, Attorney Barabino and a number of support staff had an evaluation conducted with a goal to prove that client was not guilty by reason of insanity. Once that expert conducted the evaluation, a trial date was set and on the trial date, no trial was held as the victims were not available.
Result: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED.

July 9, 2018
Harassment Prevention Order
Client was an otherwise responsible, courteous, and respectful young man who was alleged to have made lewd comments via social media to a long-time friend. The friend did not want him to contact her, but he persisted. On the day of the hearing, all the parties were able to talk and discuss the serious and concerning acts and wrote up an agreement prior to the hearing that the young man will not contact her under any conditions. That agreement was satisfactory to the court and the woman who took out the order, and the case was dismissed. Case Closed. No Harassment Order Issued.
Result: Harassment Order, DOES NOT ISSUE. CASE CLOSED.

June 28, 2018
Probation Violation/Surrender
Client had previously admitted to a Continuance Without a Finding (CWOF) and was placed on probation for a year. After performing his obligations as agreed, Attorney Barabino filed a motion to terminate his probation earlier than scheduled. On the day of his hearing, the judge endorsed the request and he was discharged early from probation. Case dismissed.
Result: Motion to Terminate Probation Early, ALLOWED.

June 27, 2018
License Suspended, Operation Motor Vehicle, Subsequent Offense
Client was a hard-working father who was in a traffic accident. Upon police inquiry, officers determined that his license was suspended. In fact, he had been convicted of the offense before. As a result, the police officer properly charged client with driving on a suspended license, subsequent offense. After several hearings and court dates, a trial was scheduled, and at the trial date Attorney Barabino was able to obtain an agreement with the District Attorney to reduce the subsequent offender portion of the charge and make a deal for short probation with no conditions on the lesser-included offense only.
Result: Subsequent Offense, REDUCED, SHORT PROBATION, NO CONDITIONS

June 19, 2018
1st OFFENSE OUI - Liquor or .08%
Improper Stopping
Client, a young professional, drank more than he was used to drinking and made the mistake of driving. He was charged with driving under the influence and a civil violation of improper stopping. According to police, he tapped a car while under the influence and vomited on his car door. Because of hitting the car, vomit, admission to drinking, and inability to perform major acts of coordination, he made the decision to plead the case. Attorney Barabino negotiated in person with the District Attorney, successfully reaching a "continued without a finding" agreement, otherwise known as a CWOF. A second negotiation session resulted in a separate agreement for a not responsible finding on the civil charge. On the day of the plea, the only disagreement between Attorney Barabino and the Commonwealth was a brains-at-risk program which the latter sought. Judge ultimately agreed with Attorney Barabino, and client did not have to attend the additional program.
Result: 24D Disposition, CASE DISMISSED IN ONE YEAR, NOT RESPONSIBLE CIVIL INFRACTION, NO ADDITIONAL PROGRAM ORDERED.