Recent Cases

Malicious Destruction of Property, NOT GUILTY, BOTH COUNTS, CLIENT RELEASED FROM CUSTODY

December 7th 2011
Salem District Court
Malicious Destruction of Property over $250.00
Malicious Destruction of Property over $250.00
Client was charged with Malicious Destruction of Property over $250.00. According to the police, he sent threatening texts to the mother of his children early in the AM hours. Soon after the accuser said she saw client outside her home walking back and forth, and when she went to huddle her children into a room, a brick was thrown at her window, shattering it. She immediately called 911 and reported the incident. When police arrived they noticed her car windshield was also broken. Client was charged with felony counts that each carried an up to two-year house of correction sentence. There was a real possibility of each sentence being imposed to its fullest since client had a seven page record that listed convictions on various crimes of violence---as well as several restraining orders. The District Attorney zealously (yet fairly and professionally) pursued the case---but she could not rehabilitate the evidence that she was given since in the end the attentive and alert jury rendered a verdict of not guilty on both counts.
RESULT: Jury Verdict, NOT GUILTY, BOTH COUNTS, CLIENT RELEASED FROM CUSTODY.

Mayhem, WITHDRAWN FROM PROSECUTION, Assault and Battery, DISMISSED

November 22nd 2011
Mayhem Chapter 265 Section 14
Assault and Battery Chapter 265 Section 15
According to police, client walked over to accuser and pulled his earring out of his ear, resulting in the accuser’s ear being torn. The issue of the actual tearing of the ear was not in dispute, since the person was taken in an ambulance and his injuries were photographed. The grotesque pictures showed the person's ear dangling in two pieces. However, the means, motive, and intent of the client were not clear or stated. In fact, upon an immediate review of client's body, it appeared that he was clearly struck, multiple times---consistent with a person defending himself, as client has consistently stated. Since Mayhem is a Superior Court charge and a grand jury had to be convened to review that particular charge, Attorney Barabino immediately forwarded the photographs to the District Attorney so they could present that evidence. Otherwise, the one-sided (and secret) grand jury proceedings would be considered without his position ever being recounted. In the end, the District Attorney elected to withdraw the mayhem charge in its entirety. Attorney Barabino scheduled the remaining charge for a jury trial, and without the necessary witness from the Commonwealth, the charge could not be prosecuted and the final charge was dismissed. No jail, no conviction, no probation, nor admission to any crime.
RESULT: Mayhem Charge WITHDRAWN from Prosecution Entirely, Missing Witness At Trial Results in Assault and Battery Charge, DISMISSED.

Two Charges of Unlawful Drug Possession, BOTH CHARGES NOT GUILTY

November 18th 2011
Possession of Class “A” Heroin Chapter 94C Section 34
Possession of Class “B” Subsequent Offense Chapter 94C Section 34
Client was a known drug user who was seen by police in a high crime area. Their instincts were that he was about to inject heroin or another drug. They approached client and saw a syringe in his hand, and nearby a spoon and a bottle cap filled with water. All these items were consistent with illicit drug use. When police searched client's vehicle they found two “twists” which were consistent with: 1) Cocaine; and 2) Heroin --based on the appearance and packaging of the items. Since client had been charged with Class B Possession earlier in his life, this charge was a subsequent offense---a greater penalty. However, no penalties were imposed since---the client was found not guilty of both charges after trial.
RESULT: BOTH CHARGES NOT GUILTY.

Multiple Counts of Vandalism and Tagging, ALL COUNTS DISMISSED AT TRIAL CONDITIONALLY

November 17th 2011
Vandalize Property Chapter 266 Section 126A
Tagging Chapter 266 Section 126B
Vandalize Property Chapter 266 Section 126A
Tagging Chapter 266 Section 126B
Client was charged with spray painting or “tagging” several different places in the city of Peabody. The client denied any involvement and the police had no evidence to support a conviction. Normally, the district attorney wouldn’t even allow such a case to go forward—but with a prior charge in Lawrence, client was identified as a “tagger” and the DA was prepared to introduce prior bad acts of his tagging noted from Lawrence police officers. A simple case initially, but in the end, fairly complex. Ultimately, a trial was scheduled and both Attorney Barabino and the District Attorney answered ready for trial. As the case was about to get underway, last minute negotiations resulted in a straight dismissal of the charges if the client paid three hundred dollars. After a brief discussion, the client he was eager to walk out of court for multiple felony counts---for the restitution of three hundred dollars.
RESULT: All Felony and Misdemeanor Counts DISMISSED AT TRIAL, upon Payment of $300 in Restitution

Drug Possession, Drug Violation, MOTION TO DISMISS BOTH CHARGES ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED

November 10th 2011
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class A Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug Violation Near School/Park Chapter 94C 32 J
Law Enforcement was watching client as he moved in and out of a motor vehicle that they had been monitoring. As they observed client and other known parties enter and exit motor vehicles, they moved in arrested all the parties. Client was charged with a distributing heroin in a school zone as well as possession to distribute heroin. The school zone violation requires a minimum two-year house of correction prison sentence, and the distribution charge would be on and after time---prison time. In this case on and after prison time was a real possibility---almost a certainty. Client had a six page “rap sheet” detailing prior convictions for larceny, receiving stolen property, breaking and entering, drug possession, resisting arrest, possession to distribute heroin, possession to distribute in a school zone and conspiracy, among others. In challenging the charges, Attorney Barabino filed a memorandum detailing the factors that should demand a dismissal of the charges. That memorandum, along with a motion and relevant case law required one result---that the motion to dismiss all the charges should be allowed, and the District Attorney agreed to the motion moments prior to starting the formal hearing.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss Both Charges, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

Two Counts of Lewdness, BOTH CHARGES DISMISSED, NO RECORD OF SEX CHARGES, NO SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION

November 8th 2011
Lewdness, Open and Gross Chapter 272 Section 16
Lewdness, Open and Gross Chapter 272 Section 16
According to police, a witness saw client pull his penis out of his pants when she drove by him. Then the witness saw client again, and once again he repeated the act. Police located and arrested client and placed two sex charges against him. If client was found guilty of the charges, he would surely have been required to register as a sex offender (SORB) aside from any imprisonment---and potential deportation—as he was not a US citizen. Moreover, client had previously been charged with Criminal Harassment, Accosting, Lewd and Lascivious Behavior, Open and Gross, Peeping Tom, and other non-sex crimes. Attorney Barabino had no choice but to bring the case to trial as the Commonwealth would be seeking the maximum penalties. However, once all parties appeared ready at trial, the Commonwealth was unable to secure the presence of that key eyewitness---resulted in a request from Attorney Barabino to dismiss the charges, which was allowed.
RESULT: BOTH CHARGES DISMISSED, NO RECORD OF SEX CHARGES, NO SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION.

Malicious Destruction of Property, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, NOT GUILTY OF ALL COUNTS

November 7th 2011
Malicious Destruction of Property
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Client was high-valued government manager with the US Air Force--employed as a civilian. His job entailed national security details and any conviction would likely have resulted in a revocation of his security clearance. A revocation of his clearance would likely have also led to the termination of his career. According to the police, client went to a home a person he had a disagreement with earlier in the evening. The police alleged that the client took out a baseball bat and assaulted complainant and damaged his car. The client was with several other friends all who settled the matter prior to trial. Attorney Barabino’s client refused to be pressured into any deal and wanted his record clean. His accuser earnestly took the witness stand, which resulted in several inconsistent statements that consequentially damaged the complainant’s story. Attorney Barabino’s client also took the stand and at the end received justice---both counts ruled not guilty.
RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF ALL COUNTS

Multiple Firearms Related Charges, Civil Penalties, Alcohol Beverage Under 21, CONDITIONAL NO JAIL TIME, DETENTION AND REMAINING CHARGES DISMISSED

November 3rd 2011
Firearm Carrying with Ammunition
Possession of a firearm without a valid License
Other Local Ordnance
Ammunition without Identification Card
Firearm carrying without a license
Alcohol Beverage under 21 Chapter
Firearm Obliterating Serial Numbers
Client was a visiting friend in Lynn, Massachusetts when police were called to his location. When police arrived they saw client, who was underage, walking with alcohol. When police approached him they stated he pulled out a shiny object out of his waistband and threw the shiny object about six feet. When police looked over at that location, they saw a loaded .22 Semi-automatic pistol. The Defendant was taken into custody and searched his person and located two switchblade knives as well. Client had a previous gun charge on his record that had been dismissed two years prior, which, although dismissed was not helpful to the perception of the client as a gang-member. After nearly two years of hearings, investigations, and motions, a deal was made that allowed Defendant to avoid jail all-together—despite the one year mandatory sentence that the law requires. Client made the final decision, and his decision was to take the deal. Client admits crime on mandatory jail sentence of one year—receives no jail after plea.
RESULT: NO JAIL After Admitting to Charge that Carries a One Year Mandatory Minimum Sentence, NO JAIL TIME. DETENTION AND REMAINING CHARGES DISMISSED.

Armed Robbery, DROPPED, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, PLEA WITH NO COMMITTED TIME

August 23rd 2011
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Armed Robbery
Police allege that client and his friend went up to another, punched and kicked him repeatedly, and eventually stripped him of his gold necklace and $80. After nearly a year of hearings and investigations into the case, it was determined that another version of events could be true. A trial was scheduled and the District Attorney announced he was simply dropping the Armed Robbery if a plea was accepted. The plea involved no committed time---and no probation conditions.
RESULT: Armed Robbery, DROPPED, PLEA WITH NO COMMITTED TIME on Assault with a Dangerous Weapon.

Assault, MOTION FOR ACCORD AND SATISFACTION ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED

August 17th 2011
Assault
Client was a non-citizen computer programmer with a bright future. He came to the United States and was staying on a H-1-B VISA. He wanted to stay in good standing with that status. Client was charged with Assault after the police received a report of him hitting his girlfriend. The police stated that the complainant had dried blood on her lip and redness on her face. The charge of assault was to be upgraded by the District Attorney because of the physical contact alleged. However, after consulting with all the parties, Attorney Barabino drafted a Memorandum of Disposition, which was essentially a written background of the client's background as well as an Accord and Satisfaction. The Accord and Satisfaction motion allows for judges in some instances to allow for a dismissal of charges—even over the district attorney’s objection. In this case, the District Attorney objected, but the judge accepted the Accord and Satisfaction. As a result, the case was dismissed.
RESULT: Motion for Accord and Satisfaction, ALLOWED. CASE DISMISSED.

1 … 53 54 55 … 62 Last »