» Second Offense OUI

First Offense OUI, CONTINUED WITHOUT A FINDING (CWOF), Plea for Second Offense OUI, OPEN CONTAINER NOT-RESPONSIBLE.

November 29th 2016
2nd OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Open Container
Client was a federal employee who was charged with a Second Offense OUI. He was alleged to have driven over some lawns and subsequently have failed a sobriety test. He also had an open bottle of vodka. His breath test was almost four times the legal limit. Client entered detox, voluntarily, prior to entering plea before the court. At the client's court hearing the Commonwealth asked for a jail sentence with a mandatory two-week impatient program. They also sought a two-year loss of license. After a plea hearing, the judge sided with Attorney Barabino and granted the client a first offense plea, despite being his second offense.
RESULT: First Offense OUI, CONTINUED WITHOUT A FINDING (CWOF), Plea for Second Offense OUI, OPEN CONTAINER NOT-RESPONSIBLE.

OUI-Liquor, Negligent Operation, License Suspension, OUI SECOND OFFENSE REDUCED TO FIRST OFFENSE, CWOF WITH DISMISSAL AFTER ONE YEAR

April 30th 2014
2nd Offense OUI- Liquor or .08%
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle
Operating Motor Vehicle with Suspended License
According to police, client drove recklessly around state police who were assisting with road construction safety. According to police report, client weaved around the police and workers in such a way that it required them to jump out of the way of his vehicle. According to the state troopers' police narrative, the defendant’s eyes were bloodshot, his speech slurred, he failed the sobriety test, and he failed a Breathalyzer test. The client weighed his options with Attorney Barabino and in the end simply wanted to bring the matter to conclusion, to get a predictable result and obtain his license back as soon as possible. Following his client’s wishes, Attorney Barabino met with the District Attorney, who remained committed to recommending a suspended six-month jail sentence, a two-week inpatient detoxification program, and related programs. The judge listened intently and diligently to all sides and in the end agreed with Attorney Barabino for a 12 Month CWOF for the OUI Second Offense and to treat it as a First Offense instead. The judge gave the District Attorney what he sought on the Negligent Operation and License Suspension.
RESULT: OUI Second Offense Reduced to First Offense Deal, SECURED, Continued Without a Finding (CWOF) for a Period of One Year, with DISMISSAL After One Year.

Leaving the Scene of Property Damage, NOT GUILTY, Second Offense OUI, ALL CIVIL VIOLATIONS NOT RESPONSIBLE

March 29th 2013
Leave Scene of Property Damage Chapter 90, Section 24 (2)(a)
2nd OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08% Chapter 90 Section 24(1) (a) (1)
According to police, client had rammed into a vehicle and left the scene of the accident. Police responded to the scene and immediately noticed, while on patrol, that the client's vehicle had damage similar that that which would be described. When police pulled the vehicle over they noticed paint matched the vehicle that was hit. They also noticed paint on the other vehicle and noticed that it matched as well. The police spoke to client and stated that his speech was slurred; he had to hold on to the side of the truck for balance; his eyes were bloodshot and glassy; his breath smelt like booze; and he was unsteady on his feet. Moreover, the client had Budweiser cans opened and unopened, strewn throughout the vehicle. Client simply wanted to gain his license back, but the District Attorney of Essex County sought jail time instead. The Commonwealth presented five separate witnesses. At sentencing, the DA requested this hard working single father be sent to prison for two years suspended and serve a full year committed in jail. In the end, the judge agreed with Attorney Barabino and denied the Commonwealth request. Judge simply placed the Defendant on probation with a brief 14 day-impatient program. All the civil violation were found not responsible and the verdict on the Leaving the Scene was a clear and resounding "not guilty".
RESULT: Leaving the Scene of Property Damage, NOT GUILTY AFTER TRIAL, All Civil Violations found NOT RESPONSIBLE. NO JAIL FOR OUI CHARGE

Second Offense OUI, Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle, Two Counts of Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury, License Suspended, ALL CHARGES NOT GUILTY

January 29th 2013
2nd OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08% Chapter 90 Section 24(1) (a) (1)
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle Chapter 90 Section 24(2)(a)
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury Chapter 90 Section 24
Leaving the Scene of Personal Injury Chapter 90 Section 24
License Suspended, Operating Motor Vehicle with c90 §23
According to police, client was highly intoxicated, and the evidence of the intoxication was clear. According to eyewitnesses, client drove into two other vehicles and then ran off. Moments later, eyewitness confirmed to police that the Defendant was the operator of the motor vehicle. Once police confirmed that information they questioned client, who admitted that she was intoxicated and that she was the driver of the motor vehicle. Client failed the field sobriety test and once at the station agreed to take a Breathalyzer test, which concluded that she was twice (.16) the legal limit. After several witnesses testified, the jury at trial deliberated and returned a verdict of not guilty of all counts.
RESULT: ALL CHARGES NOT GUILTY AFTER TRIAL

Second Offense OUI, Child Endangerment, DISMISSED, MOTION TO DISMISS ALLOWED, NO JAIL TIME ON SECOND OFFENSE

February 17th 2012
2nd OFFENSE OUI- Liquor or .08%
Child Endangerment with Operating Under the Influence
Client was an employee with the Department of Defense. He was charged with Reckless Endangerment of a Child and Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol Second Offense. According to the police, the client's ex-wife received a call from client that he was intoxicated and driving around with her child. She became frantic and searched for client. When she located him, she argued with him driving the motor vehicle in the condition he was in and refused to give her the keys. She left (with her son) and called police since client had insisted on driving. She cooperated with police and police found him a few hundred years down the road. They stated that he failed the sobriety test and failed the Breathalyzer with a reading of 3.1%. 3.1% is nearly four times the legal limit. Prior to trial, Attorney Barabino made vigorous attempts to have the case thrown out in its entirety but was not successful. As the case moved forward, he sent the case down for Motion to Dismiss hearing regarding the Reckless Endangerment charge (which carried mandatory jail time), and that motion was allowed. At the day of trial, every witness appeared, leaving the client with the pre-trial option of a plea, which he eagerly sought. When the deal was argued before the judge, the Commonwealth asked the judge to force client to attend parenting classes and install a Sobrietier machine installed in his home. Attorney Barabino argued against it and was successful. The judge agreed with Attorney Barabino and the client left court with what he wanted---no jail time.
RESULT: Reckless Endangerment of a Child, DISMISSED, Motion to Dismiss, ALLOWED, NO JAIL TIME ON SECOND OFFENSE.