Recent Cases

No Probable Found, (PC), Charges Do NOT Issue.

August 22, 2024
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury
Client was a very kind and responsible young man who was out drinking in the early am. He was driving home, and he struck another car, The other car was heavily damaged, and he did not remain on the scene and left. He was charged with leaving the scene of personal injury. Fortunately, he was not charged with OUI despite his admission of drinking and some other factors. The charge has of Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury has a 6-month jail sentence attached, if jail imposed and a required guilty for any disposition. Included in the sentence is a mandatory one-year loss of license. Here, Barabino put forth a variety of materials to include the history and background of the client, but more importantly, an impediment in the filing of the report. That impediment appeared to have resulted in the Magistrate not issuing the Charges.
RESULT: No Probable Found, (PC), Charges Do NOT Issue.

RESULT: Case Does NOT Move Forward.

August 22, 2024
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Civil Violations
A particularly impressive young man found himself in a bind. He was operating his motorcycle when he slightly hit the side of a car at a stoplight. Anytime a person contact with another driver like that you must stop and exchange information. Otherwise, it will result in a leaving the scene charge. Here, client didn’t stop, he also, drove away in a reckless manner, including a red light and marked violation. He was caught in camera and the police issued him a citation. He called Attorney Barabino right away and told client to go directly to the courthouse and request a hearing within 4 days of receipt of that notice which can give him a magistrate hearing, which he did. At the hearing, a variety of facts and circumstances were detailed resulting in all allegations not being charged. And civil infractions, not responsible.
RESULT: Case Does NOT Move Forward.

No Probable Found, Case Dismissed.

August 19, 2024
Violation of a Harassment Order
Client was a very decent and responsible young man who was accused of violating a harassment order. The incident began when the client was living with a roommate that was harassing him. As a result, client sought and obtained a harassment protection order against roommate. In response to harassment order, the roomate then got an emergency order against client. In-between the time client got his harassment order, and the other person got their order, the other person claimed that client violated the order. That claim was not true, and client testified that he was not at the location when alleged. Additionally, client had video evidence that supported his testimony that he did not violate the order. As a result, no probable cause was found against client.
RESULT: No Probable Found, Case Dismissed.

Domestic A & B does NOT Issue at Magistrate Hearing

August 15, 2024
Domestic Assault and Battery
Client was a super pleasant hardworking CDL Driver who was accused of Domestic Assault and Battery. According to the police report, client was having a dispute with mother of their child over parenting concerns. Mother raised a slipper in the air signaling that she was preparing to strike him. He took control of her hand and then did strike her twice. The incident was caught on camera. His former spouse was asked if she wanted to pursue the matter as the hearing date was approaching and she very reasonably said she had no interest in doing so. She simply asked that the restraining order that she obtained remain in effect and he obey it. All parties were very reasonable and understanding that focus on moving forward. This result was a great opportunity to move forward in positive and healthy manner for client and all involved.
RESULT: Domestic A & B does NOT Issue at Magistrate Hearing.

District Attorney Agrees to Pause the Entire Prosecution with an Agreement that continue with Therapies

July 30, 2024
Resisting Arrest
Assault and Battery on a Police Officer
Assault and Battery on a Police Officer
Assault and Battery on a Police Officer
Destruction of Property Under -1200
Disorderly Conduct
Client was a very pleasant, registered nurse who was in a healthy and supportive marriage. Client had no prior criminal history but some manageable mental health obstacles. On the date she was arrested as her mental health problems escalated to a concerning level. She became disorganized and confused. She met with a stranger and made concerning statements that were aggressive and disorganizing. She was in essence having a mental health breakdown. She damaged a door of a stranger and then struck police officers who responded. In conclusion she was arrested and charged and placed in a short-term mental health facility. She quickly improved her mental health with therapy, medication and the support of her husband. In the end, a deal was struck where the District Attorney would dismiss the charges in return for her agreeing to continue with therapy and medication as needed. No Admission of wrongdoing.
RESULT: District Attorney Agrees to Pause the Entire Prosecution with an Agreement that continue with Therapy & Medical Support.

Criminal Complaint Does Not Issue Against Client

July 24, 2024
Trespassing
Client was a young adult who trespassed on a school roof. The circumstances of the event caused the police genuine concern. The police conducted a fairly through investigation to ensure that the client and his friend were simply acting outside the bound of good judgment and nothing more. The police did not arrest client but sent him a notice of a magistrate hearing. Although the confidence was high that the matter could be resolved at that hearing, Attorney Barabino coordinated the matter prior to the hearing to ensure the highest level of predictability or resolution and not forwarded to arraignment. If the matter was sent to arraignment, it would then forever be on his criminal record, even if dismissed. So, the matter was tabled for a period of 6 months so it would never go on the young man’s record. If it did, even though it would eventually be dismissed in some form, and even though it is a relatively low-level charge, the young man would have to put that entry on a variety of job applications, government clearances, and background checks, for the rest of his life. The consequences, if not resolved, as they could have an undesirable and unfair impact in that person’s life. In this case, the matter was not sent to arraignment and will never appear on the person’s criminal record.
RESULT: Criminal Complaint Does Not Issue Against Client.

OUI 1st and Other Charges Resolved.

July 24, 2024
OUI, 1st Offense
Resisting Arrest
Leaving the Scene of an Accident
Negligent Operation
Client was all-around law-abiding guy who had too many drinks one evening. According to the police report client was operating his vehicle in the early morning hours when he drove off the roadway into costly shrubbery of another. While trying to extract his vehicle from the location, he struck an object that shattered his rear window. The homeowner chased intoxicated client with a golf club while waiting for the police to arrive. While running from neighbor police arrived and choose to fire a taser into client back of client which dropped him to the ground. Client was arrested and choose to participate in the breath test analysis which provided a reading of 2.0 which is close to three times the legal limit. Client had a dizzying night and wanted to attempt to mitigate permanent damage to his employment and criminal record, among other. Attorney Barabino drafted an extensive background memorandum and memorandum of law for review for the District Attorney. In the end, an agreement was made, where client would receive the most lenient 1st offense OUI disposition allowed by law, with an agreement that the charge be dismissed in a year. The leaving the scene charge also dismissed in a year in complies with probation and finally, the resisting arrest charge and negligent operation were simply dismissed, entirely. Client was given the minimum license loss as well and can move forward with no criminal convictions eventually after the one-year period.
RESULT: OUI 1st and Other Charges Resolved.

RESULT: No Admission of Guilt for Domestic Assault and Battery

July 17, 2024
Domestic Assault and Battery
Client was an all-around pleasant hard-working client. He was charged with Domestic Assault and Battery. The police were called to his girlfriend’s apartment for a disturbance. When police arrived they interviewed his girlfriend who stated that client got angry over a text message and grabbed her by the hair and started to repeatedly slapping her in the face. Police noted that accuser had blood on her hands which she stated was from her nose. She was checked out by EMT’s, and client was arrested. The case proceeded through the normal course post-arraignment. Here, the decision was clear that we could not accept any guilty conviction, nor can we accept even an admission to sufficient facts where the case would eventually be dismissed. The reason we could not accept either is the client was a green card holder and the consequences would have been negatively impactful as an immigration consequence, aside from all normal impacts that a criminal case has on a person. Right away we developed a long written historical summary of the client, complete with attachments, supporting affidavits and other helpful material. We took that information and met the assigned District Attorney who diligently reviewed everything and agreed that they would cease prosecution with an agreement that the get screened for any alcohol abuse, which he will easily and successfully complete. The case remains “open” for a year and the client always keep the presumption of innocence and admits no wrongdoing.
RESULT: No Admission of Guilt for Domestic Assault and Battery

Not Guilty of Carrying a Firearm-Avoids Mandatory Jail Sentence.

June 25, 2024
Carrying Firearm without a License
Carrying a Dangerous Weapon
Assault and Battery
Ammunition without an ID Card (4 Counts)
Client was a very pleasant, hardworking father who was accused of striking his child. Police arrived and saw what appeared to be marks indicating he struck his child. They then discovered several knives, tactical vest, ammunition and finally a flare gun that he had inserts which made the flare gun capable of firing ammunition. Client was arrested and detained in a 58A Dangerousness Hearing. A Dangerousness hearing is a hearing where the court determines if no bail should issue, and the person be required to stay imprisoned---essentially, pending trial. Here, the hearing the held and Attorney Barabino was successful in obtaining his clients release from custody. Eventually, over the course of a year experts were consulted and retained. A trial was scheduled. On the day of trial partial plea was entered where the client admitted to only the possession of the ammunition. The judge sided with the client and not the government and gave client probation on the ammunition. The Commonwealth dismissed all the remaining charges except the carrying the firearm. The trial was held for carrying a firearm without a license. The verdict was not guilty for carrying the firearm.
RESULT: Not Guilty of Carrying a Firearm-Avoids Mandatory Jail Sentence.

Magistrate Does Not Issue Shoplifting (And Trespass) Charges.

June 11, 2024
Trespassing
Shoplifting by Asportation
Client was a very pleasant established widow who was charged with trespassing and shoplifting. She had a no-trespass order against her as she had attempted to shoplift from the same location on a prior occasion and was not charged but given a no-trespass order. She did not comply with the requirement of the original no trespass order and tried to shoplift a second time. She was stopped by law enforcement and given a notice to appear at the magistrate hearing. Attorney Barabino sought her a therapist and she had that visit combined with an affidavit submission. In the end, for a variety of reasons the police and magistrate extended her the consideration of the charges not being issued against and she retains a clean record.
RESULT: Magistrate Does Not Issue Shoplifting (And Trespass) Charges.