» Class C Drug Possession

Drug Possession Charges, Conspiracy, Drug Violation, MOTION TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE ALLOWED, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED.

March 16th 2015
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B, Subsequent Offense
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class C, Subsequent Offense
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B, Subsequent Offense
Conspiracy to Violate Drug Law
Drug Violation Near School/Park
Client was a hard working father and husband. According to police, he was a convicted drug dealer who was dealing drugs. According to a report filed by police, client met with another individual who was buying his drugs. An informant had been providing information to police, they said. Police saw client and ordered him to exit the motor vehicle. They asked him questions and lastly confiscated his phone, money and small amount of drugs. The charge required an indictment to Superior Court because it was not his first arrest for dealing. However, the case ultimately remained within District Court. Police initiated forensic investigation into his phone after receiving search warrant. Attorney Barabino would later seek to have that thrown out as evidence, but first he sought a hearing to reduce the school zone/park violation. He filed a Motion to Dismiss, and after a hearing, that motion was allowed. That meant client was no longer subject to the mandatory two-year prison sentence. That charge was consequently dismissed. Afterwards, another hearing was set and motions and legal memoranda filed to suppress or wipe out all the evidence. Attorney Barabino attempted to persuade the judge that the search was illegal. When the judge ruled that the search is indeed illegal, that evidence that was located was not permitted to be used. After the hearing another date was set to hear the judge's ruling. At that hearing, the judge filed a lengthy legal memorandum setting out the reasons why all the evidence would be suppressed. All charges would be dismissed.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss School Zone/Park, ALLOWED, Motion to Suppress all the evidence, ALLOWED.

Multiple Drug Possession Charges, MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED AND ALLOWED, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED UPON PENALTY

September 24th 2013
Drug, Possession Class B (Cocaine) Chapter 94C Section 34
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class C Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class C Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug Possession Class C Chapter 94C Section 34
Drug Possession Class C Chapter 94C Section 34
Client was driving on an expired hardship license or "Cinderella" license. That license is valid for only a twelve-hour period, once per day. On this day, police pulled over client who was driving in violation of that license restriction. A traffic stop occurred and eventually various drugs were located by police. Client was charged, along with his vehicle's passengers, for the above offenses. After several months, a Motion to Suppress Evidence was prepared and a memorandum of law outlining why the police did not properly follow the rules drafted. The court agreed with Attorney Barabino's request for a dismissal. On the date of the hearing the Commonwealth agreed that the stop was not in accordance with the rules of stopping a vehicle and the motion was allowed.
RESULT: Motion to SUPPRESS, FILED AND ALLOWED via agreement, All charges DISMISSED, $100.00 fine for unlicensed operation charge.

Possession with Intent to Distribute Class A, B & C Drugs, DISMISSED

August 8th 2013
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class A Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class B Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class C Chapter 94C Section 32A (a)
Client was under observation from police when he was stopped and arrested. According to police, they stopped Defendant and saw drugs in plain view on his car seat. The police searched the vehicle and located what they believed to be various drugs that were being prepared for distribution. The drugs that were allegedly intended to be distributed were thought by police to be Neurontin, Lexapro and Codeine. After nearly two years of litigating the case in court, a drug certification was provided to the Defendant, which stated that some of the drugs were in fact heroin. To add to the confusion, there was no chemist to testify as to the specific composition of the drugs at trial, which is almost always necessary for a conviction. At the day of trial, the Commonwealth was unable to secure the presence of the State Chemist. Attorney Barabino asked the court to dismiss the case as a result. The court, for various reasons, allowed the request for a dismissal. Case Closed.
RESULT: Possession with Intent to Distribute Class A, B & C Drugs, DISMISSED.