» Drugs

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 28^th 2017
Unnatural and Lascivious Conduct
Client was an educated mother and grandmother victim of drug addiction. During that period of addiction, police saw her making a movement and behavior consistent with oral sex to a known Level III sex offender. That event was nearly two years ago, and she has been in warrant status since. To client’s credit, she did what the court could only hope for in those missing years. She got herself clean and off drugs, into rehabilitation, and fully reentering society. For those reasons, and her otherwise decent criminal record, Attorney Barabino was able to argue that the Commonwealth’s sentence of a felony conviction, 18 months of probation, and various rehabilitation programs were not the answer. At the conclusion of the plea, the court accepted a 60-day period where her case would be dismissed if she remained out of trouble with no conviction.
RESULT: DISMISSED, if defendant stays out of trouble for sixty days

March 27^th 2017
Assault
Threats to Commit a Crime
Client was a hardworking professional with a limited prior record. He was charged with Assault of his girlfriend and making threats. According to police, after night of drinking he made threatening gesture and statements, all of were which supported by police charges. Client wanted to resolve the matter without delay and take responsibility. However, even though the District Attorney presented a reasonable recommendation, it included the lengthy (42) forty-two week Batterers Intervention program. Also, the District Attorney wanted random drug testing. After a hearing, the judge agreed with Attorney Barabino that the prior two conditions were not necessary as long as defendant agreed to remain alcohol free.
RESULT: No Batterers Program Required and No Drug and Alcohol Screens- CASE DISMISSED AFTER ONE YEAR

January 5^th 2017
Criminal Procedure Rule 30: Post-Conviction Relief- New Trial
Drug, Possession Class B (Cocaine)
Client was a hard-working business owner and professional who sought to undo a past mistake. Years ago, after having been found guilty of possessing cocaine, he wanted to reverse that conviction. His contraband had been tested by a known, discredited lab chemist. The result was that a good faith basis to reverse the conviction was filed with an affidavit, memorandum, and certified supporting documentation. That package was filed with the court, and a hearing date was scheduled. In the interim, Attorney Barabino met with the District Attorney who was in agreement with his request. The Commonwealth did not file opposition. In the interest of justice, the motion for a new trial was allowed, and the case was dismissed.
RESULT: Motion for New Trial, ALLOWED, 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.
RESULT: Motion to Dismiss, FILED, CASE DISMISSED.

June 1st 2016
1st OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Marked Lanes Violation
Client was a young man who was having substantial substance abuse issues. He was in a motor vehicle accident and was clearly intoxicated. As client resided out of state, Attorney Barabino arranged for probation to be transferred and negotiated with the district attorney to resolve the matter on the same day as arraignment. No restitution needed to be paid. Not responsible on the civil citation determined. At the plea hearing, the judge sided with Attorney Barabino and granted the defendant a Continuance Without a Finding (CWOF), allowing the case to be dismissed. No drug or alcohol screens. All in same day.
RESULT: Same day PLEA, out of state OUI-alcohol, open container, NOT RESPONSIBLE

May 10^th 2016
Conspiracy to Violate Drug Law
Intimidation of a Witness
According to jail security, client, who was an inmate, was involved in a scheme to have drugs brought into the jail. He was a target because he had been involved in drug dealing before. The case was developed with great detail by the investigators. They assembled recordings of phone calls, collected physical evidence, and found a participating co-conspirator to admit to the scheme. Then yet another co-conspirator admitted to the scheme. The drugs were sent to a laboratory for testing and were positive and the case was almost ready for trial. As the case proceeded, one of the four co-conspirators plead out to a sentence; then a second co-conspirator admitted his guilt and then another plead guilty. Only Attorney Barabino’s client remained, who had no such intention to plead guilty. Although he had been involved with drugs in the past—he was not guilty and was not going to admit to being so. Soon, after a separate motion to suppress the identification was held to preserve his rights moving forward, a trial date was set. The day of trial came and the required co-conspirator to prove the crime did not appear and the case was dismissed in full.
RESULT: All Charges DROPPED/DISMISSED

May 19^th 2015
Drug, Possession Class A, Subsequent Offense
According to police, they arrived at a local McDonald's bathroom to find the accused under the influence of a drug and with brown bags of powder and a needle. According to police, he admitted that he had taken heroin. The Commonwealth made an attempt to obtain medical records to support the charge, but after a hearing, that was denied. Also, the commonwealth was unable to obtain a drug certification certificate from the state crime lab. As a result, at the day of trial, they simply withdrew the prosecution. The court and its staff along with the District Attorney were professional, competent, and classy. In the end, the case was withdrawn from prosecution. In essence, Dismissed.
RESULT: Class “A” Possession, SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE, DISMISSED.