Recent Cases

March 20^th 2013
Possession of Class “A” Heroin Chapter 94C Section 34
Client was a very pleasant young woman from a great family. However, unknown to her family she had developed an addiction to heroin—a very powerful one for that matter. Attorney Barabino filed a rather obscure and rarely used IIIE statute. Under IIIE, if the Defendant acknowledges their addiction, enters and completes rehabilitation, the charge against them will be dropped. The court allowed the motion to be filed nearly a year ago and after one year of negative drug screens provided to the court, the case against the client was dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

March 15^th 2013
Reckless Endangerment of Child
Drug, Possession Class B (Cocaine)
Possession of Class “A” Heroin
Possession of Class “E” Substance
Client was a hard working waitress who had been associated with drug use and abuse for some time. On the above date, she was charged with possession of Class A, B, and E drugs and Reckless Endangerment of a Child. According to police, they received a 911 emergency call that two people were badly intoxicated, and they were consequently dispatched to investigate. Upon doing so, they saw a man who appeared to be intoxicated and client who was seated in a vehicle. According to police, there was evidence they were about to shoot heroin with their child in the back seat. Attorney Barabino challenged the method and extraction of client as unconstitutional and after hearing testimony, arguments being made, and supported case law asserted, the judge issued a decision, which allowed a Motion to Suppress Evidence. Since the evidence was excluded, the case would be dismissed. Case dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

March 5^th 2013
Disturbing the Peace Chapter 272 Section 53
Dangerous Weapon, Carry, Subsequent Offense Chapter 269 Section 10(B) & (D)
Client was a hard working electrician. He was charged with Disturbing the Peace and Possession of a Dangerous Weapon, Subsequent Offense. The second charge was required to be prosecuted in Superior Court and State Prison was mandatory upon conviction. However, the District Attorney allowed the case to remain in District Court and prosecuted it as a first offense. Attorney Barabino filed a Motion to Dismiss the charges in their entirety. The motion, complete with a lengthy memorandum of law and supporting affidavit, was provided to the court and a hearing was scheduled. After the motion, the court agreed that the motion should be allowed and the case dismissed. The District Attorney simply agreed to dismiss the Disturbing the Peace charge after the hearing.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

January 29^th 2013
2nd OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08% Chapter 90 Section 24(1) (a) (1)
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle Chapter 90 Section 24(2)(a)
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury Chapter 90 Section 24
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury Chapter 90 Section 24
License Suspended, Operating Motor Vehicle with c90 §23
According to police, client was highly intoxicated, and the evidence of the intoxication was clear. According to eyewitnesses, client drove into two other vehicles and then ran off. Moments later, eyewitness confirmed to police that the Defendant was the operator of the motor vehicle. Once police confirmed that information they questioned client, who admitted that she was intoxicated and that she was the driver of the motor vehicle. Client failed the field sobriety test and once at the station agreed to take a Breathalyzer test, which concluded that she was twice (.16) the legal limit. After several witnesses testified, the jury at trial deliberated and returned a verdict of not guilty of all counts.
RESULT: ALL CHARGES NOT GUILTY AFTER TRIAL

January 10^th 2013
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury Chapter 90 Section 24
Client was a licensed electrician who was charged with leaving the scene of personal injury. According to police, client was exiting onto a roadway when he struck a jogger with his vehicle. After contact was made, client undisputedly left the scene. Jogger was taken by ambulance to the hospital. At Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Barabino was able to provide perspective to all involved, which included phone calls, potential witnesses, and maps of the area to aid his client's case. Based on all the information presented, it became clear that client left the area, only briefly, and only due to the aggressive conduct of the jogger after being struck. In the end, no complaint was issued.
RESULT: Application for Complaint, DISMISSED.

December 20^th 2012
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class D Chapter 94C Section 32C(a)
Client was a young man with no criminal record. According to police, client was in a motor vehicle when police approached and saw what they described as smoke emitting from the windows. The police searched and interviewed all the people in the vehicle. During the search of the vehicle, they discovered two scales used for weighing marijuana, and marijuana itself. The amount of marijuana combined with the scales and statements resulted in the arrest of client and another. A Motion to Suppress was filed and testimony was elicited from the arresting officers as well as the parties charged with this crime. After a hearing, the court took the matter under advisement. At the next court date, the court issued their ruling, declaring that the police acted unconstitutionally and that the evidence should be thrown out as inadmissible. As a result, the charges were dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

December 13^th 2012
Leave Scene of Property Damage
Client was a hard working music teacher and single dad. According to police, he was in a parking lot and accidently hit another motor vehicle and purposely refused to stop. Client had no criminal history and an excellent driving record. The District Attorney’s main concern was that the other party being made whole and that they had no out-of-pocket expenses. Once that was confirmed, Prosecution simply dismissed the charge with a $200 court cost. Client was very pleased with end result. Case dismissed.
RESULT: Leaving the Scene of Property Damage, DISMISSED.

December 13^th 2012
Yield at Intersection, Fail Chapter 89 Section 8
License Suspended, Operating Motor Vehicle with c90 §23
Leave Scene of Property Damage Chapter 90, Section 24 (2)(a)
Use of Motor Vehicle Without Authority Chapter 90, Section 24 (2)(a)
Client was a heavy machinery operator who was charged with multiple criminal and civil driving offenses. According to police, client drove into another vehicle and both motor vehicles were destroyed. Client had a suspended license for drinking and driving and had been charged prior to the incident in question. A guilty conviction after trial would have almost certainly meant jail time. The entire case hinged on an obvious identification flaw, and the Commonwealth admitted that flaw at the day of trial. As a result, they offered to dismiss nearly all the charges if client would admit to a lenient penalty on one of the charges. Client stood fast and refused the generous offer. In the end, the Commonwealth simply dismissed the entire case.
RESULT: ALL CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CHARGES DISMISSED.