» Not Guilty Verdict

Operating Under the Influence, NOT GUILTY

April 3rd 2019
OUI- Liquor or .08%
Refusal to Obey a Police Officer
According to police, client was causing a disturbance at a tow-yard. They arrived and began asking him some questions as he sat in his stationary, but, running vehicle. They smelt the strong odor of alcohol coming from his breath. Client was inattentive and non-responsive to the officers demands and questions. When the defendant stood, he swayed slightly. The police placed the Defendant under arrest operating under the influence of alcohol and refusing to identify himself. At the booking procedure he passively resisted almost all commands and at one point had to be carried to the jail cell. In the end, he was charged with OUI and refusing to identify himself. He was acquitted after a trial of OUI and ordered to pay one hundred dollars for refusing to identify himself.
RESULT: Operating Under the Influence,NOT GUILTY. Fine of $100.00 for the Refusing to Identify.


December 10th 2018
Unlicensed Operation of MV
A pleasant young professional had a mix-up on a license reinstatement and mistakenly was driving without a license. The police charged him with the crime after he was hit by another motor vehicle. He hired Attorney Barabino and they prepared for the Clerk-Magistrate hearing. They obtained details of the accident and insurance confirmations, his resume and his impressive background as well as his new license, which he received after the incident. At the hearing, it was determined that NO CHARGES SHOULD ISSUE. Client retains his otherwise spotless criminal record.
RESULT: NO CHARGES SHOULD ISSUE. Client retains his otherwise spotless criminal record.

Restraining Order Violation, NOT GUILTY

June 27th 2013 

Violation of Abuse Prevention Order
Client was a young man with a supportive family. According to police, he contacted an ex-girlfriend after she properly obtained a no-contact restraining order against him. According to the court order presented in court—the Defendant was not to call or contact the victim. At trial, the young lady whom he was supposed to have no contact emotionally recalled him calling her after the order was obtained—a direct violation. After cross-examination, the Defendant rested his case and several hours later the jury returned a verdict of not-guilty.