» Marked Lanes

January 11^th 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.

November 4^th 2015
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
License not in Possession
A young man had swerved off the road and struck a telephone pole. It was a single-car accident and police responded quickly and professionally. Client was transported to the hospital with injury. After two court dates and consultation with the District Attorney, a disposition was entered with the court. The result was an agreed upon dismissal in 90 days time. Also an entry of not-responsible was entered on Marked Lanes Violation as well -an otherwise additional small victory which prevented a surcharge and points against insurance.
RESULT: As long as Client remains arrest-free for ninety (90) days and enrolls in a half-day program called “Brains-at-Risk” this case to be DISMISSED. Client ADMITS TO NOTHING and still retains the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.

October 2^nd 2014
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
Client was a hardworking web-programmer. She was driving her motorcycle on the state highway in a reckless manner at speeds exceeding 100 mph. When pulled over by police, she immediately complied with officer order to stop, and was apologetic. Despite her apologies, the professional and respectful trooper issued her a criminal summons, and appropriately so. Based on a number of factors, including client’s background and history, Attorney Barabino’s request to have the criminal charge be stayed and not go forward if civil portion of the claim were paid was allowed.
RESULT: Application for Criminal Complaint, NOT ISSUED.

April 24^th 2014
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Marked Lanes Violation
Client was in a one-person car accident. He was interviewed by state police and eventually arrested and charged with Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and a Non-Criminal charge of Marked Lanes Violation. Since being charged, the defendant's motor vehicle insurance skyrocketed and he faced a mandatory future license loss, fines and fees, and shockingly, a potential two year sentence in a house of correction. After interviewing client and examining the scene and related materials, Attorney Barabino filed a Motion to Suppress the statements made by defendant at his hospital bed. Once the motion was filed, a hearing date was scheduled and all the parties, including police, were required to appear before a judge to hear evidence. Fortunately for the defendant, an experienced district attorney had reviewed the file and after speaking with the officer and reviewing all the facts, allowed a straight dismissal of the criminal charge and a "not responsible" for the civil charge of a Marked Lanes Violation.
RESULT: Motion to Suppress, FILED, Criminal Case DISMISSED. Civil Violation Declared, NOT RESPONSIBLE.