» Commonwealth

January 10^th 2018
SECOND OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Client was a hard-working, former U.S. Army Officer and war veteran was charged with operating under the influence of alcohol, 2^nd offense. According to police, he was operating his vehicle when he lightly struck another vehicle. He was mumbling and disheveled and intoxicated to the point where he was unable to speak coherently and maintain basic balance. Despite the egregious allegations, he did have some defenses. However, despite those defenses, he simply wanted to bring the case to conclusion as quickly as possible, which Attorney Barabino did. The law provides a minimum mandatory disposition for people charged with a second offense charge within ten years of the first charge. As a result of client’s background, Attorney Barabino was able to negotiate the minimum of a sixty-day house of correction sentence, suspended for a two-year period. Client will also be required to attend a mandatory two-week impatient program.
RESULT: 2nd OFFENSE OUI, Standard 2^ndOffense Statutory Disposition

December 4^th 2018
Unlicensed Operation of MV
First Offense OUI- Liquor or .08%
Failure to Stop
A hard-working individual was in a minor car accident and State Police were called to the scene and charged client with operating under the influence of alcohol; driving unlicensed and a civil infraction. According to State Police, client’s breath smelt of alcohol, he was slurring his words, he was unsteady on his feet and had red glossy eyes. When the respectful officer asked about the accident, client was not entirely clear about the account and the damages to the vehicle did not fit his account. Attorney Barabino crossed examined the both the arresting officer and the booking officer. At the conclusion of the case, the jury deliberated and agreed that the client was NOT GUILTY of driving under the influence. The court also marked his civil infraction NOT RESPONSIBLE and the client had already agreed to a three-month probation period on the unlicensed operation which at which time it will be dismissed.
RESULT: JURY RETURNS VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY.

October 29th 2018
FIRST OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Open Container
Speeding
Marked Lanes Violation
Client, a young hard working-working professional was charged with Operating under the influence of Alcohol. In addition to the criminal charge she was given three separate "civil" citation(s) which included possessing an open container, speeding and marked lanes violation. According to Police in the early morning hours, client was speeding and weaving. She was found with a glass of beer, red bloodshot eyes and the smell of alcohol on her breath among other indicators of intoxication. Despite what appeared to be a strong case for the Government, she did have a strong defense. Despite the existence of this defense, client understandly, simply wanted to get the case wrapped up quickly, with the least cost and effort possible. As a result, Attorney Barabino was able to negotiate with the District Attorney a 1st offense disposition whereas, the charge will be dismissed after a one-year period. This is a fairly predictable result when the client has an otherwise clean record, no accident at the scene and no additional circumstances such as very high breath test result or disrespectful conduct to the officer. In addition to the 1st offense plea there was an agreement to dismiss all the "civil" infractions which is particularly important to avert an extended license suspension for the multiple surcharges which can result from civil infractions.
RESULT: 1st OFFENSE, 90/24D Disposition, Civil Infractions found NOT RESPONSIBLE.

September 26th 2018
Assault and Battery
Client, a young hard-working builder was accused by his girlfriend of assault and battery. The charges were weak and a product of her serious mental illness. Although serious mental illness doesn't mean your allegations are untrue, it can cause people to act irrationally and aggressive and this was one such case. She jumped on his bed while sleeping and threatened to break his television. And he simply refused to engage her hysterics. However, when police came to the house they saw her in bare feet and arrested him, as they assumed, according to the report, that given that she was in bare feet in 35 degree weather and the statements that client was likely the aggressor and he was charged. Attorney Barabino and client confidently requested a trial date and at the trial she did not appear so the case was DISMISSED.
RESULT: CHARGE DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL.

August 30^th 2018
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Speeding
Marked Lanes Violation
Failure to Stop
Client, a bank professional with no prior criminal record, was charged with the above criminal offenses. According to police, he was driving at speeds well over 100 miles per hour and failed to stop his vehicle when officers insisted that he do so. Attorney Barabino was hired, and at a Clerk Magistrate's hearing, Defendant himself testified and provided evidence to mitigate the circumstances of the incident in question. Defendant testified as to his clean criminal record, his clean Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) record, and his genuine remorse over what happened. As a result, no probable cause was found for the criminal violations and Defendant agreed to pay $400.
RESULT: NO PROBABLE CAUSE FOR CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS, Defendant pays $400.

August 29th 2018
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Malicious Destruction of Property
Client was a respected business owner who, according to police, threw an object at a car causing permanent damage to the vehicle. After the incident, words were exchanged between client and accuser (owner of the vehicle). When police arrived, accuser cooperated with their investigation into the matter, and Defendant was subsequently charged with two felony counts of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon and Malicious Destruction of Property. Attorney Barabino was hired by client and gathered witnesses, photos, and others items and exhibits to offer an alternative explanation as to what happened for the Clerk's consideration. In the end, an agreement was reached by all parties involved that client would pay the amount of damage caused to the car in exchange for a resolution of the case.
RESULT: NO APPLICATION FOR COMPLAINT TO ISSUE

September 5^th 2017
Abuse Prevention Order
Client, a hard-working father, had been in a romantic relationship with a woman years ago. When the relationship ended, she secured a restraining order which prohibited him from being within 100 yards of her at all times. According to her, while she was working at her place of employment, he went to the place of employment and stared at her in violation of the order. Defense agreed that he did briefly walk by her store where she was working, but that he did not know she worked there and he was as surprised as she was to discover her there. Although a strong case for the defense, the Commonwealth felt otherwise. The Commonwealth brought the case to trial and even obtained prior allegations against the defendant to show his “bad acts”. At trial, judge ruled that the Commonwealth could not admit the prior bad acts, as a guilty verdict would surely mean deportation for the otherwise, innocent defendant. However, after witness after witness testified, a not guilty verdict was returned.
RESULT: NOT GUILTY AFTER TRIAL

August 2nd 2017
Conspiracy
Attempt to Evade Tax
Client was in possession of a large amount of tobacco products from a southern state—without license or stamp. The amount of tobacco was substantial. Immigration consequences if the case was not successful. Several court dates led to the filing of a motion to suppress evidence. At that key hearing, Commonwealth declared that they would not be able to secure a necessary witness and were then forced to dismiss the entire case.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress Evidence, FILED. Case DISMISSED PRIOR TO HEARING.