» Dismissed

DISMISSED, Pre-Arraignment

October 11th 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.


April 17th 2019
Assault and Battery on a Family Member
A wonderfully supportive mother of a young college student asked her son to clean his room. Son felt that mother’s requests was unreasonable and began videotaping mother with his phone as he laid in bed. Mother got agitated and tried to grab the phone from son. Son called police and police arrested mother. Police charged MOTHER with assault and battery. They arrested mother despite the son admitting that he bit his mother. The Essex County district attorney sought cashbelieving that the community member who had lived and worked in the area for thirty years and had no criminal record would flee the jurisdiction. Attorney Barabino asked for a received personal recognizance with some conditions pending trial. A trial was sought as the district attorney refused to dismiss the charges. Ironically, it was the mother who woke up son and drove him to court for her trial. At trial, Attorney Barabino sought the young man be appointed a lawyer for a 5thamendment, despite the district attorney believing that one did not exist. The judge allowed attorney Barabino’s request and the victim asserted his 5thamendment right to self-incrimination. The judge dismissed the case. Case DISMISSED.

CHARGE(s) DISMISSED on DAY OF TRIAL/Probation Extended

October 16th 2018
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order
Violation of Abuse Prevention Order
Client was a particularly pleasant father who had tumultuous relationship with his former wife. The client was charged with three separate complaints of violation a restraining order. All the charges were questionable but a conviction on any was sure to result in his incarceration. The charges were concerning for the court since the client was on probation for assaulting and beating his ex-wife already--a plea that he entered with another attorney. In the end, client and attorney Barabino requested a trial and at the day of trial, the District Attorney offered a deal which client felt was simply too good decline and accepted the deal. No additional jail and three of four charges dismissed.
RESULT: Three of the Four Charges DISMISSED; Fourth Charge agree to NO JAIL and Extended Probation for 6 months.

Application for Complaint, DOES NOT ISSUE.

August 2nd 2018
Client was working his second job as a manager for a restaurant when a patron made repeated complaints. After trying to resolve the situation to the patron's satisfaction, the man (a lawyer), said he would tell his Twitter followers and began taking pictures. After being asked to leave, the patron complied and was escorted out by client. However, when patron was just about to leave, he turned back around and bumped into client and patron. Police were immediately called. The patron declared that he would sue, and he was given a settlement by the owner of the restaurant to avoid the cost of litigation. In the end, Attorney Barabino came to the hearing with videotape, statements, witnesses and other exhibits. After a hearing, the complaint did not issue. It will remain open for six months, assuming no other concerns.
RESULT: Application for Complaint, DOES NOT ISSUE.


October 16th 2017
Larceny over $250.00
Client was a young man who stole over five thousand ($5,000.00) dollars worth of electronic goods from a chain store in the course of his employment there. The case against client was strong as the store had investigated the case for months and assembled a trove of electronic evidence. In addition, they secured an admission to the crime from client prior to him being formally charged. Negotiations continued for several months and parties involved reached an agreement: client would admit to the charge, he doesn’t pay any probation fees, agrees to take a half program to learn about theft, and pays back the money of the items that he stole. In the end, no conviction would appear on his record as long as he complies with the agreement.

Drug Distribution in a School Zone, CASE DISMISSED

November 2nd 2016
Drug, Possession to Distribute Class D
Drug Violation Near School/Park
Client was a young man in high school who was charged with distribution of marijuana in a school zone. After an investigation and digestion of the discovery and facts, a motion to dismiss was filed. The motion detailed the facts, the law, and argued how the case should be dismissed. The lengthy memorandum was filed and discussions with District Attorney additionally held. In the end, the hard working and professional district attorney agreed to simply dismiss the charges. All charges dismissed.


July 22nd 2013
Uttering a False Prescription Section 94C Section 33E
Client was a licensed professional who had been caught by law enforcement passing a false prescription for a narcotic. The evidence was clear, and the police did an investigation that was accurate, professional and proper. The client had no criminal record, and the police were receptive to negotiating the matter. Attorney Barabino was able to meet with law enforcement prior to the magistrates hearing and at the hearing produced mitigating documentation, which included prescription history as well as evidence of new drug screen and related matters. As long as client does not re-offend and remains out of any criminal conduct, the matter will be dismissed without client ever appearing in a courtroom and more importantly without any stains on her criminal record.
RESULT: Application for Complaint, DISMISSED.