» Clerk Magistrate

October 11^th 2019
Failure to Stop for Police
A hard-working IT professional was charged with failing to stop for police. The process to resolving the case was lengthy—but the result was right. After a clerk-magistrate hearing was properly filed, a hearing date was set down. Prior to the hearing, all the investigation and preparation were done to include viewing the scene and taking photographs. When the date arrived, the police needed a continuance for personal reasons. A new date was set but the court placed the date down for an arraignment in error, since it should have simply been a new magistrate hearing. Attorney Barabino filed a motion to dismiss to ensure that a magistrate hearing was now scheduled. However, after a brief consultation with the District Attorney an agreement was made to simply dismissed the case, prior to arraignment. The key here is prior to arraignment. Since the charge was dismissed, PRIOR to arraignment it will never appear on his record.
RESULT: The Charge, DISMISSED, Pre-Arraignment.

February 5^th 2019
Threats to Commit a Crime
A wonderful, young married couple were going through a rough patch and one spouse made an allegation of murdering of the other. Police were notified and a report was appropriately taken and charges for a clerk-magistrate hearing filed. At the hearing, Attorney Barabino brought in the all the facts of the regretful statement made, and how this was an isolated situation and lastly how the couple sought therapy after the incident. In the end, and based on all the circumstances and facts, a decision was made NOT to issue the complaint. NO CRIMINAL CHARGES EVER appear on the RECORD.
RESULT: Application for Criminal Complaint, DISMISSED.

August 11^th 2017
Leave Scene of Property Damage
Client was a young man about to embark on his first year at college. However, in the interim break, before school started, he was in a car accident. After the accident, client fled the scene, and damaged two separate vehicles in his flight. Fortunately, parents reached out to Attorney Barabino early, and he was able to coordinate a clerk magistrate hearing within the four-day period by law. Hearing was held, with communication and documentation given to the parties involved beforehand. Result was no complaint issues.
RESULT: Complaint DOES NOT ISSUE, with agreement to provide insurance documentation within sixty (60) days to authorities.

June 2^nd 2017
OUI –Drugs Serious Bodily Injury 2^nd Offense
Failure to Stop for Police
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Client, a retired teacher, was reported to police to be having some type of medical emergency and acting irrationally. Client drove off, driving erratically on opposite lanes of travel and reaching speeds of over ninety miles an hour. With police in hot pursuit, client hit a telephone poll, split it in half, while the car flipped over and burst into flames. Fortunately, police were at the scene to extinguish the flames, and rescue client. She was charged for OUI-drugs, failure to stop for police, and negligent operation of a motor vehicle. Attorney Barabino entered a plea on negligent operation, for which a disposition would take place in the future. The two other charges went to trial. A verdict of not guilty was returned on both the OUI-drugs second offense and failure to stop for police. There were challenges in the Commonwealths case and in the end, client was grateful for the efforts of all involved, including the police, who charged him. Another charge of serious bodily injury was reduced at a clerk magistrate hearing prior to arraignment.
RESULT: OUI-drugs, second offense, NOT GUILTY, failure to stop for police, NOT GUILTY.

April 20^th 2017
Evading Taxi Fare
A Boston University Student was charged with evading a taxi fare. In this case, the fare was particularly large amount of nearly five hundred dollars. The police believed in good faith that the defendant intentionally evaded the fare, and brought a complaint before a clerk magistrate. Attorney Barabino reached out to all involved, got the fare payed, and at the hearing, client was found not responsible. Case dismissed.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.

October 28th 2016
Shoplifting by Asportation
Client was a young man who stole and was caught doing so. He admitted to doing what he did, but felt embarrassed and apologetic. Fortunately, he was given a clerk magistrate hearing. He hired Attorney Barabino, who took him to the hearing and acknowledged his wrongdoing and asked for consideration. The police and court determined that based on various factors that they would not issue the charges. No complaint to issue. Never appears on a record.
RESULT: NO COMPLAINT TO ISSUE

October 3^rd 2016
Shoplifting by Asportation
Client took items that did not belong to her. To summarize, the acts that she committed were sufficient for a charge and conviction of shoplifting. However, the clerk magistrate hearing process in Massachusetts allows for representation by an attorney at the hearing. In this case, Attorney Barabino was selected. He went to the scene of the incident, conducted a detailed review with client on her background, and had a discussion with the storeowner. After the hearing—no issue processed. Client free to leave with no evidence of any charge ever being filed. No Charges Issue.
RESULT: NO COMPLAINT TO ISSUE

May 7^th 2014
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Fireworks, Possession Unlawful
Client was bright college student and band member. He was charged with Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and Possession of Fireworks. According to a state police report, he was parked on the left side of the highway-asleep in his vehicle. When police interviewed him, he had alcohol on his breath and his eyes were bloodshot. Yet unusually, the police only charged him for Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and also for fireworks that were within the motor vehicle and are a criminal offense under Massachusetts's law. Attorney Barabino presented to a clerk magistrate the facts and background and the magistrate eliminated the fireworks charge. Once arraigned on the remaining charge, an agreement was made with the Commonwealth whereas some conditions would be met with administrative probation on the assurance that the matter would be dismissed upon all requirements.
RESULT: APPLICATION OF COMPLAINT FOR UNLAWFUL FIREWORKS POSSESSION, DISMISSED, Upon satisfaction of certain conditions, NO CONVICTION.