» agreement

May 25, 2017
Unlicensed Operation of MV
Client was unable to obtain a license and was cited for (4^th Offense) driving without a license. Given his background, history, and surrounding circumstances, he was given a dismissal with the agreement that client pay a two-hundred-dollar penalty.
Result: OPERATING UNLICENSED, DISMISSED ON COURT COSTS.

January 5, 2017
Criminal Procedure Rule 30: Post-Conviction Relief - New Trial
Drug, Possession Class B (Cocaine)
Client was a hard-working business owner and professional who sought to undo a past mistake. Years ago, after having been found guilty of possessing cocaine, he wanted to reverse that conviction. His contraband had been tested by a known, discredited lab chemist. The result was that a good-faith basis to reverse the conviction was filed with an affidavit, memorandum, and certified supporting documentation. That package was filed with the court, and a hearing date was scheduled. In the interim, Attorney Barabino met with the District Attorney who was in agreement with his request. The Commonwealth did not file opposition. In the interest of justice, the motion for a new trial was allowed, and the case was dismissed.
Result: Motion for New Trial, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

September 11, 2015
OUI - Liquor or .08%
Client was a hard-working hairstylist and single mother. According to police, she drove while under the influence of alcohol. This case presented a variety of legal issues. Those included conflicting statements by the accused and a parking clerk who stated that she could barely stand. Police officers testified accurately that the accused performed her sobriety test in “less than ideal” conditions and had zero problems with at least one test. In the end, the jury could not reach a verdict. In any criminal trial, all the jurors must agree that the accused is “guilty” beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime charged or “not guilty”. Generally, an agreement is reached, one way or the other. Sometimes that agreement takes longer than expected. In this case, the jury was deadlocked and simply could not agree. In the end, the parties agreed to a “Rodriguez” charge, which means that the judge is giving them one more opportunity to come to an agreement. Here, the instruction was given, but in the end, the jurors simply could not agree and the court ruled the matter a mistrial. During the retrial, the case was tried again and the witness/employee of the parking garage had an even different version of the events than before. On that date, the jury reached a quick and decisive decision with a brief deliberation and returned a verdict of not guilty.
Result: JURY FINDS DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY.

September 27, 2014
Larceny over $250.00
Client was a radio personality who was also a trustee of his condominium. In his role as trustee, he borrowed money without authority and failed to pay his personal condominium fee. The result was that he owed the condominium board close to $25,000. The police were called and interviewed the client. Client admitted that he owed funds. In the end, a significant effort was made by many people over nearly eight months to enter into an agreement whereby a promissory note attached to client's own mortgage would ensure that the funds were paid back. Police were willing to allow the parties to make the agreement without applying for a criminal complaint or indictment.
Result: Client pays back $24,248.68 via payment plan, NO COMPLAINT TO ISSUE.