» Disorderly Conduct

Assault and Battery, Disorderly Conduct, GENERAL CONTINUANCE DISPOSITION

February 21st 2018
Disorderly Conduct
Assault on a Household Member
Client was hard working cement contractor who was arrested for giving his son a bloody lip (at the police station). Client’s son was arrested for operating under the influence of drugs and client went to police station to bail him out. When son got aggressive with father in the police station parking lot, father popped him giving him a bloody lip. Father was arrested and charged with assault and battery and disorderly conduct. Eventually, a trial was scheduled and set and moments before the trial was about to begin deal was struck which the defendant would receive a general continuance for six months on the assault and battery charge. The disorderly conduct charge was continued without a finding for three-month’s time.
RESULT: Assault and Battery charge GENERALLY CONTINUED FOR SIX MONTHS, disorderly conduct charge CONTINUED WITHOUT A FINDING FOR THREE MONTHS

Assault and Battery, Disorderly Conduct, NOT GUILTY

February 15th 2018
Disorderly Conduct
Assault on a Household Member
Disturbing the Peace
Client was a hard working father who had dispute with his daughter that resulted in him being charged with assault and battery, disturbing the peace, and disorderly conduct. A trial was eventually scheduled and held. There were a number of different versions of the event but the client and his witnesses were consistent on the witness stand with their version of the events. The Commonwealth’s witnesses waivered and were not consistent. As a result, the court delivered not guilty verdicts on the assault and battery and disorderly conduct charges, and only a one-hundred dollar fine for disturbing the peace.
RESULT: NOT- GUILTY OF ASSAULT AND BATTERY AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT

Marked Lanes, NOT RESPONSIBLE, Negligent Operation, DISMISSED

January 11th 2016
Second Offense OUI- Liquor or .08%
Disorderly Conduct
Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
Client was stopped by police after hitting the fence of a police station. Police determined that the smell on his breath, unsteadiness and related factors were sufficient to arrest -assumption was correct. Client before had been drinking and was surprised to realize his level of intoxication was as high as it was. The biggest factor for client was accepting responsibility and getting a license back at the earliest possibility. Attorney Barabino and client were able to negotiate no jail time. Not responsible on Marked Lanes Violation. Negligent Operation Dismissed.
RESULT: Alternative No Jail Disposition, Marked Lanes, NOT RESPONSIBLE, Negligent Operation, DISMISSED.

Assault and Battery, Disorderly Conduct, NOT GUILTY ALL CHARGES

April 10th 2014
Assault and Battery on a Police Office
Disorderly Conduct
Client was a hard working sales professional that was charged with Assaulting and Battering a Police Officer and Disorderly Conduct. According to the MBTA Police, Client mouthed off at them using profanities and thrusted his shoulder into an officer, throwing him back several steps. Once able to recover, the officer attempted to grab a hold of the defendant's arm, to which a brief struggle ensued. Profanities continued and the defendant was charged with the above crimes. After five separate trial dates, the defendant was finally placed on trial before a jury. The jury came to the conclusion that the defendant did not try to cause a disturbance and he did not assault and batter the police officer.
RESULT: ALL CHARGES NOT- GUILTY.

Vandalism, Disorderly Conduct, MOTION TO DISMISS ALLOWED, DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

July 30th 2013
Vandalize Property
Disorderly Conduct
Client was spending time with her boyfriend at a local hotel. According to police, they were overflowing their room's bathtub when they were called. As a result, the police and firefighters responded to the hotel room. When they arrived, boyfriend simply refused to allow law enforcement entry to the room. They were forced to pry open the door—resulting in even more damage. In the end, the court allowed a motion to dismiss for the vandalism charge and simply a dismissal for the Disorderly Conduct charge if the client agreed to a court cost expense of $150.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss, ALLOWED, Disorderly Conduct DISMISSED on Court Cost.

Attempt to Commit Crime, NOT GUILTY, Disorderly Conduct, CHARGE FILED FOR A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS

October 9th 2012
Attempt to Commit Crime Chapter 274 Section 6
Disorderly Conduct Chapter 272 Section 53
Client, a retired airlines employee, was charged with attempting to commit a crime and disorderly conduct. According to police, client had entered the hallway of an apartment building and repeatedly struck the door with her foot. The occupant watched this occur through her peephole and after increased concern, called police. Police then stopped the Defendant down the street from the apartment complex. When interviewed by them, client gave conflicting accounts of what occurred and she was arrested for attempting to break in to the apartment and disorderly conduct. At trial, the District Attorney attempted to modify the complaint to reflect a subsequent charge of disorderly conduct since she had been convicted before this date in a separate incident. The judge denied that request and the client ultimately passed no time in jail for that charge. After trial, the evidence of the witnesses failed to support a charge of breaking and entering and the client was acquitted.
RESULT: NOT-GUILTY of Attempt to Commit a Crime Charge, Disorderly Conduct Charge FILED for a period of two Months.

Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, Disorderly Conduct, MOTION TO SUPPRESS ALLOWED, ASSAULT WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON DROPPED

April 12th 2012
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon Chapter 265 Section 15B (b)
Disorderly Conduct Chapter 272 Section 53
Client was unemployed and was charged with Assault with a Dangerous Weapon as well as Disorderly Conduct. Police allege that he was purchasing alcohol when he had a dispute with another gentleman and that man's female friend. Eventually a knife was alleged to have been displayed by client and client was subsequently arrested. Initially, client refused to admit to wrongdoing to the police—yet when police interviewed him a second time, he admitted threatening the other man. However, when police interviewed client that second time, he was not given his Miranda Rights. When that was discovered, Attorney Barabino filed for a Motion to Suppress all the statements made, since the police did not “mirandize” client. The court, after reviewing and hearing testimony, agreed with Attorney Barabino and allowed his Motion to Suppress the admission of guilt. At the day of trial, the witnesses recanted their testimony---the District Attorney simply dropped the charge of Assault with a Dangerous Weapon.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress, ALLOWED, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, DROPPED.