» Attorney Barabino

July 17^th 2014
Operating Motor Vehicle with Suspended License
Client was a hard working, perfect SAT-scoring engineer, who was simply accruing too many moving violations, which confusingly triggered multiple license suspensions. After clearing up one of the violations in a different court, the above complaint issued, but fortunately he applied for and received a clerk magistrates hearing. The clerk magistrate was diligent, fair, and respectful. He stated that if three months were to elapse without any further offenses, client should expect no complaint to issue. Client appeared with Attorney Barabino and the case was in fact dissed, prior to arraignment, and the paperwork shredded by the court.
RESULT: Application for Complaint DISMISSED, PRIOR to Arraignment.

June 18^th 2014
Probation Violation/Surrender
Client was a bright young man who required representation for a probation violation. He had several violations. His violations included multiple positive drugs screens—meaning he used drugs in violation of his contractual agreement. He also failed to appear for probation, and additionally, while he was waiting for his final probation surrender, he was charged with another probation violation of assault and battery inside the jail. After months of discussions, the judge said he would release the defendant with conditions. Client stays in jail for nearly four months—but in the end avoids a lengthy state prison sentence and is released from custody.
RESULT: CLIENT REPROBATED, with Additional Conditions. NO STATE PRISON TIME.

April 30^th 2014
2nd Offense OUI- Liquor or .08%
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Operating Motor Vehicle with Suspended License
According to police, client drove recklessly around state police who were assisting with road construction safety. According to police report, client weaved around the police and workers in such a way that it required them to jump out of the way of his vehicle. According to the state troopers' police narrative, the defendant’s eyes were bloodshot, his speech slurred, he failed the sobriety test, and he failed a Breathalyzer test. The client weighed his options with Attorney Barabino and in the end simply wanted to bring the matter to conclusion, to get a predictable result and obtain his license back as soon as possible. Following his client’s wishes, Attorney Barabino met with the District Attorney, who remained committed to recommending a suspended six-month jail sentence, a two-week inpatient detoxification program, and related programs. The judge listened intently and diligently to all sides and in the end agreed with Attorney Barabino for a 12 Month CWOF for the OUI Second Offense and to treat it as a First Offense instead. The judge gave the District Attorney what he sought on the Negligent Operation and License Suspension.
RESULT: OUI Second Offense Reduced to First Offense Deal, SECURED, Continued Without a Finding (CWOF) for a Period of One Year, with DISMISSAL After One Year.

February 12^th 2014
Marked Lanes Violation
Operating Motor Vehicle with Suspended License
Client was a hard working computer engineer who was stopped for a Marked Lanes Violation. When he was stopped for a marked lanes violation, the officer informed him that his license was suspended---a criminal offense. Attorney Barabino negotiated with the very reasonable and experienced Middlesex prosecutors, who after reviewing all the facts and the client's otherwise outstanding background, agreed to dismiss the charge of license suspension, with court cost, and find him not responsible for the civil infraction.
RESULT: Charge DISMISSED on Court Cost, Civil Infraction, NOT RESPONSIBLE.

January 23^rd 2014
Possession of Class B, Subsequent Offense
Client had previously admitted guilt to a charge of possession of cocaine, subsequent offense. Attorney Barabino sought to reopen his case since the drugs had been tested by the drug lab manipulator “Annie Dookham”. Attorney Barabino brought a motion to reopen the case or a Motion for a New Trial. That motion was allowed despite being vehemently opposed by the District Attorney. The District Attorney refused to dismiss the charges even though client had served a majority of the jail time that is permitted for the charge. As a result, Attorney Barabino sought to dismiss the evidence, since he alleged that it was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights—which ultimately would have forced the case to be dismissed. The court, in its eventual ruling, sided with the defendant. In this case, the Commonwealth sought additional time to consult with their appellate division, but the result remained clear, and despite the additional time, the case would be dismissed.
RESULT: Motion for a New Trial, ALLOWED, Motion to SUPPRESS, ALLOWED, Case DISMISSED.

January 21^st 2014
Possession of Class “A” Heroin
Client had been accused of dealing drugs from his motel room. According to police, they had credible information that client was dealing and proceeded to obtain a search warrant for evidence of drug dealing. The police were successful in obtaining the warrant and initiated a raid on what they thought was a drug compound. The result was that the young couple was caught in possession of drugs--not distributing them. They were arrested and Attorney Barabino reviewed the warrant in great detail and upon recognizing a defect, filed for a hearing to throw out the evidence. That hearing was granted, his motion allowed, and the drugs were not allowed to be used against the defendant. As a result, the case was dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress Search Warrant, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED.

December 17^th 2013
Resisting Arrest
Assault and Battery on a Police Office
Client, a hairdresser, had accumulated several criminal complaints against her, alleging she had committed several different crimes. In each case, the police alleged that the defendant was unruly and offensive to police when they arrived to respond to the 911 emergency calls. On one occasion, the defendant went into her home and refused to leave. When police asked her to step outside she, according to Police, pushed the officer from behind and used some profanity. When police began to arrest her, they claimed she required three cops to arrest her due to her violent nature and actions. Attorney Barabino and the defendant were comfortable in having a jury decide whether she intended to commit Assault and Battery on an Police Officer. However, at the trial date, it was unnecessary as the District Attorney simply dismissed the charge. Probation was allowed on the remaining charges and no jail time as a result.
RESULT: Assault and Battery on a Police Officer, DISMISSED. NO JAIL TIME ON OTHER CHARGE, RELEASED FROM CUSTODY.

December 5^th 2013
Malicious Destruction of Property
Malicious Destruction of Property
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
The defendant was at his home when police came and began an investigation into an allegation that he shot an elderly man with a BB gun, twice. When police interviewed the mother of defendant she declared that they were just out on the roof of their home shooting. Police recovered the BB gun and defendant and his mother made statements that were not helpful. Moreover, police had received other complaints of a similar nature the day before from this location, relating to the gun. A Motion to Suppress the statements made by the defendant's was filed. The judge allowed the defense's motion. After nearly a year, the case came to trial, and the limited evidence resulted in a full dismissal.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress Statements, ALLOWED, CASE DISMISSED AT TRIAL.