October 23rd 2019
SECOND OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Client was a hard-working musician who was charged with OUI, for the 2nd time. Moreover, he was charged within ten years of each other which makes him ineligible for an otherwise very favorable disposition. According to police, he negligently drove into a parked car. And what made this case unique was the police observed him firsthand, whereas normally, they respond to the scene of the accident, on this occasion they witnessed it. Client was polite and agreed to take sobriety test, which he failed. He also agreed to a breathalyzer test which he failed. He simply wanted to deal to resolve everything and simply wanted to take responsibility. The District Attorney took everything into consideration, including his background and lack of serious criminal history and agreed to have him not go to jail, nor have any conditions of probation such as a SCRAM device or random drugs screens. The result was to go to negotiate the minimum of a sixty-day house of correction sentence, suspended for a two-year period. Client will also be required to attend a mandatory two-week impatient program, with aftercare.
RESULT: 2nd OFFENSE OUI, Standard 2nd Offense Statutory Disposition, Unlicensed Operation NOT RESPONSIBLE.

1st OFFENSE, 90/24D Disposition

October 29th 2018
FIRST OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Open Container
Marked Lanes Violation
Client, a young hard working-working professional was charged with Operating under the influence of Alcohol. In addition to the criminal charge she was given three separate "civil" citation(s) which included possessing an open container, speeding and marked lanes violation. According to Police in the early morning hours, client was speeding and weaving. She was found with a glass of beer, red bloodshot eyes and the smell of alcohol on her breath among other indicators of intoxication. Despite what appeared to be a strong case for the Government, she did have a strong defense. Despite the existence of this defense, client understandly, simply wanted to get the case wrapped up quickly, with the least cost and effort possible. As a result, Attorney Barabino was able to negotiate with the District Attorney a 1st offense disposition whereas, the charge will be dismissed after a one-year period. This is a fairly predictable result when the client has an otherwise clean record, no accident at the scene and no additional circumstances such as very high breath test result or disrespectful conduct to the officer. In addition to the 1st offense plea there was an agreement to dismiss all the "civil" infractions which is particularly important to avert an extended license suspension for the multiple surcharges which can result from civil infractions.
RESULT: 1st OFFENSE, 90/24D Disposition, Civil Infractions found NOT RESPONSIBLE.


October 25th 2018
SECOND OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Open Container
Marked Lanes Violation
Client, was a world-class martial artist, dad and otherwise responsible citizen. According to the police, the client was driving erratically when a citizen called the police to investigate. When police arrived, they found client was operating his vehicle and in possession of an open bottle of brandy. The client agreed to a breathalyzer test and blew a .26 which is three times the legal limit. The Commonwealth sought a six-month suspended sentence and two-year loss of license. In addition, they requested a two-week impatient program. Attorney Barabino sought a first offense which the law allows, if the prior offense was more than ten years as was the case. Attorney Barabino provided a memorandum to the court outlining the clients unquiet and distinctive career path. In the end, the court agreed with Attorney Barabino for a 1st offense disposition. So, he received a guilty conviction, but as a first offender. The result will be he will be allowed to request a hardship license before the registry at a sooner date and support his family while maintaining safety and sobriety for the him and the community in general. Also, client does not have to attend the two-week impatient program.


May 31st 2018
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Client, hard working union member, had an unexpected argument and exchange with a woman who he had never met prior. The argument escalated and words were exchanged. She then made an accusation that he burnt her leg with his lit cigarette which client admitted was flicked in her direction. She went to the police and showed them where she said a burn mark existed that she said resulted. Despite a great difference of opinion of accuser's account, including accusation of cigarette burn, client opted for a more safer result with plea deal. This plea deal included no anger management or drug screens and an agreed upon reduction from the felony change of "dangerous weapon" to the misdemeanor charge of assault and battery.

Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicles, DISMISSED

December 29th 2017
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Miscellaneous Municipal Ordinance 14-1
Client was a young man about to begin his first year of college. According to police, he was driving recklessly, passing cars and almost striking an officer. When police stopped him they were concerned that he was under the influence of an intoxicating substance. In addition to the facts witnessed by the police officer, client was disrespectful and verbally combative with the officer. In the end, to avoid a conviction on his record, client agreed to being on probation for 18-months, a driver safety course, and an evaluation to ensure that he is not abusing illicit drugs. If successful, the charge will be dismissed at the conclusion of 18-months. Additionally, his speeding fine and charge was found not responsible.
RESULT: DISMISSED, on condition client completes 18-month probation with conditions.

First Offense OUI, DISMISSED After One Year of Probation, Civil Violation NOT RESPONSIBLE.

December 28th 2017
1st OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Miscellaneous Municipal Ordinance 14-1
Client, a successful business owner, was charged with operating under the influence of alcohol. According to the police, he was driving under the influence when he crashed into another motor vehicle. The effects of alcohol were clear and obvious. His breath test result was nearly double the legal limit, and a bottle of alcohol in the car was another factor indicating that this otherwise reputable business owner made a mistake. He came to Attorney Barabino desiring to resolve what he had done, as favorably as possible.
RESULT: First Offense OUI, DISMISSED After One Year of Probation, Civil Violation NOT RESPONSIBLE.

OUI-drugs, Second Offense, NOT GUILTY, Failure to Stop for Police, NOT GUILTY

June 2nd 2017
OUI –Drugs Serious Bodily Injury 2nd 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.


May 5th 2017
1st OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Marked Lanes Violation

Client was a successful biotech executive. After leaving work late one night, he got into a one-car accident involving fire department property. At a plea hearing, the District Attorney sought that the accused be found guilty of an OUI offense, based on the severity of the crash. Attorney Barabino argued for a different outcome, which would preserve his criminal record and eventually have the case be dismissed. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court sided with Attorney Barabino and client began the process for obtaining his hardship license and moving on from his mistake. Attorney Barabino will continue to monitor any restitution owed for the damaged city property. Court issued client not responsible for civil infraction of Marked Lanes violation.

Unnatural and Lascivious Conduct, CONDITIONAL DISMISSAL

April 28th 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

Threat to Murder, NOT GUILTY

April 14th 2017
Assault Chapter
Threats to Commit Murder
Assault and Battery

Strangulation or Suffocation
Client had been previously convicted of seriously abusing his girlfriend many decades ago. Now, once again, she accused him of the same crime. Client denied those new accusations, but also realized that based on his past conduct and the credible nature of the evidence, that a plea was preferable since it would mitigate the otherwise harsh sentence that the judge has proposed. However ultimately, the case went to trial. Client was convicted of all counts except threats to commit murder, for which he was found not guilty.
RESULT: Threat to Murder, NOT GUILTY.