Recent Cases

March 16^th 2015
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B, Subsequent Offense
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class C, Subsequent Offense
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B, Subsequent Offense
Conspiracy to Violate Drug Law
Drug Violation Near School/Park
Client was a hard working father and husband. According to police, he was a convicted drug dealer who was dealing drugs. According to a report filed by police, client met with another individual who was buying his drugs. An informant had been providing information to police, they said. Police saw client and ordered him to exit the motor vehicle. They asked him questions and lastly confiscated his phone, money and small amount of drugs. The charge required an indictment to Superior Court because it was not his first arrest for dealing. However, the case ultimately remained within District Court. Police initiated forensic investigation into his phone after receiving search warrant. Attorney Barabino would later seek to have that thrown out as evidence, but first he sought a hearing to reduce the school zone/park violation. He filed a Motion to Dismiss, and after a hearing, that motion was allowed. That meant client was no longer subject to the mandatory two-year prison sentence. That charge was consequently dismissed. Afterwards, another hearing was set and motions and legal memoranda filed to suppress or wipe out all the evidence. Attorney Barabino attempted to persuade the judge that the search was illegal. When the judge ruled that the search is indeed illegal, that evidence that was located was not permitted to be used. After the hearing another date was set to hear the judge's ruling. At that hearing, the judge filed a lengthy legal memorandum setting out the reasons why all the evidence would be suppressed. All charges would be dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss School Zone/Park, ALLOWED, Motion to Suppress all the evidence, ALLOWED.

March 5^th 2015
Unarmed Robbery
Assault and Battery
Client was charged with Unarmed Robbery and Assault and Battery. According to police, a man called police and said three people just beat him up and robbed him. Unfortunately for defendant and two friends, they had been walking down the street from a party just a few blocks away. Initially, police found money in their pockets similar to what had been taken, blood on one person's shirt, and positive identification from the victim. However, soon it became clear that they were a victim themselves as a large party of similar looking people had just concluded. There was no blood and the money was simply their own. Nevertheless, the case proceeded through the court system. The police testified at a hearing that the young men were all friendly and respectful. Prior to trial, a challenge by Attorney Barabino and his two co-defendant lawyers petitioned to Suppress the Identification—as it was simply the wrong one---or a misidentification. Ultimately, that motion was partially allowed and the District Attorney elected to dismiss all charges. Case dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress, ALLOWED (In Part), Case DISMISSED.

December 2^nd 2014
Possession to Distribute Class D
Client was a passenger driving in a motor vehicle with his friends. They were also under the eye of a special response unit or a specialized anti-drugs investigation unit. That unit converged on the vehicle and confiscated nearly 100 grams of marijuana, scales, ledgers for recording transactions, and over $1000 in cash. Attorney Barabino requested a challenge to the motor vehicle stop via a Motion to Suppress evidence. Once that motion, affidavits, and memorandum of law were filed, the police were brought into court for a hearing. The court issued a decision after a month’s wait indicating that the evidence should be thrown out. As a result, the case will be dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress All Evidence, ALLOWED. CASE DISMISSED.

October 21^st 2014
Permitting Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Client was a hard working kindergarten teacher who allowed her husband to drive her motor vehicle without a license. He has since obtained his permit, and upon providing verification of a full and authenticated license, will have this matter be closed. No complaint ever issues.
RESULT: APPLICATION FOR COMPLAINT DISMISSED, PRIOR to Any Arraignment.

October 17^th 2014
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Client was a hardworking cleaner with three children. She had a boyfriend who had a hard time letting go of their relationship and accused her of waving a knife at him. The police performed a thorough investigation, which was helpful to client. A Clerk's Hearing was ordered and at the hearing Clerk declined to issue the complaint. Although the hearing lasted fifteen minutes or less, Attorney Barabino and client had prepared nearly an entire day's worth of effort collecting documents and interviewing witnesses. In the end, the Complaint did not issue.
RESULT: NO CRIMINAL COMPLAINT ISSUED.

October 10^th 2014
OUI - Liquor or .08%
Client was a hard working government employee with no criminal record. According to police, he rear-ended another vehicle and was given sobriety test, which they say he failed. Client took a Breathalyzer test and registered over twice the legal limit. Attorney Barabino consulted with his client very early, who simply sought to be walked through the process as efficiently and inexpensively as possible. The District Attorney sought an 18-month probation period but after a hearing, the court allowed the defendant's request for a one year period instead.
RESULT: COURT ALLOWS DEFENDANT REQUEST FOR LESS PROBATION

October 9th 2014
License Restriction, Operate Motor Vehicle
Ignition Interlock, Operation Without
According to police, client was driving an unregistered vehicle with a bad inspection sticker when police pulled him over. Upon review, they determined that he did not have a legally required Breathalyzer machine installed in his vehicle, which is a mandatory 6-month jail sentence with no parole, probation, or suspended sentence. Client understood that jail was nearly unavoidable but regardless he underwent intense preparation for trial with Attorney Barabino. At the first trial date, the Commonwealth was unable to secure a necessary witness, so another date was selected. On, the second trial date, the Commonwealth was unable to secure a necessary witness from the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV), leaving them with limited options. The result was, after consultation, a full dismissal of the mandatory jail sentence.
RESULT: Mandatory Jail Sentence, DISMISSED.

October 8^th 2014
The Sex Offender Registry Board (SORB) categorized client, a young incarcerated man, as a Level III Sex Offender. The Level III status is devastating to the offender, since it requires active public notification of wherever the offender lives and employs. In the present case, Attorney Barabino had assembled all the relevant documentation for presentation to the SORB Board. After careful consideration, it was assumed that the most impactful and meaningful way to present the case of the offender was for him to testify, which he did with Attorney Barabino. After several weeks of waiting for the written decision, all the parties were notified that client was reduced to a LEVEL II status--thereby not requiring public notification of his crimes.
RESULT: LEVEL III SEX OFFENDER STATUS REDUCED TO LEVEL II.