» Strangulation

58A DANGEROUS HEARING NOT HELD IN CUSTODY, Client released Pending Trial, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED.

November 20th 2018
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon
Assault and Battery on Child with Serious Injury
Intimidation of a Witness Chapter
Assault and Battery
Strangulation or Suffocation
Client was a pleasant young father with no prior record and steady job. His relationship with his wife was tumultuous but he stayed committed for the four children they shared. According to police, he got upset one afternoon and beat her to include to include, strangulation. Moreover, the police alleged her interfered with her ability to call police. Attorney Barabino challenged the 58A dangerous order which would keep him incarcerated until trial. Attorney Barabino was successful in gaining his pre-trial freedom at the 58A hearing. Soon after the district attorney filed additional charges alleging, he abused one of the four children. That charge was incorporated the first charge in a motion to join the charges. As the case proceeded through the court system Attorney Barabino and client reviewed and reports, 911 calls and began preparation for what we will be jury trial. At the day of trial, the ex-wife asserted her marital privilege which would allow her to waive her testimony—leaving the Commonwealth with no case to prosecute. Despite this assertion of martial privilege, it doesn’t apply to child abuse cases, which this one had as well. However, after much deliberation, the District Attorney decided they had no admissible evidence to introduce and Attorney Barabino request for a dismissal on the charges was ALLOWED.
RESULT: 58A DANGEROUS HEARING NOT HELD IN CUSTODY, Client released Pending Trial, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED.

Strangulation, DISMISSED AT TRIAL

November 16th 2017
Assault and Battery
Strangulation or Suffocation
Client was a young man just out of high school when he was charged with grabbing his brother and putting him into a headlock. Police responded to the home, charged him with a felony, and Commonwealth successfully imprisoned him until the day of his trial with no bail allowed. Attorney Barabino was successful in securing his release until the day of trial, despite the District Attorney arguing for a 58A Dangerous Hearing Detention Hold. After his release from custodial detention, defense made normal preparations for trial. At the day of trial, Attorney Barabino and his client announced “Ready for Trial”, but with minutes to go before empanelment of the jury, the District Attorney announced that the complainant was refusing to cooperate and could not go forward. Attorney Barabino requested dismissal of the charges. Case dismissed. RESULT: CLIENT RELEASED PENDING TRIAL, CASE DISMISSED DAY OF TRIAL.

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.

Assault and Battery, Strangulation, 58A DANGEROUS HEARING OVERTURNED, NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES

March 28th 2017
Assault and Battery
Assault and Battery
Strangulation or Suffocation
Client was a hardworking federal employee. He was charged with Strangulation of his ex-girlfriend, Assault and Battery on his Girlfriend, and Assault and Battery on another involved in the incident in question. It was alleged that he was angry at his ex-girlfriend after discovering text messages from her former spouse on her phone. It was alleged that he came into her bedroom, pushed her friend into a dresser, and then proceeded to choke ex-girlfriend for nearly a minute. The district attorney applied for and received a Dangerous Hearing. Based on facts of the case, it was determined that client was too dangerous to be released into society. Attorney Barabino appealed that ruling and was successful. Client was then released pending trial. At trial, the jury ruled him not guilty of all the charges.
RESULT: 58A DANGEROUS HEARING OVERTURNED, Client released Pending Trial, NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES.

Strangulation, RELEASED AT 58A, DISMISSED AT TRIAL

March 8th 2017
Assault and Battery
Assault with Dangerous Weapon
Strangulation or Suffocation
Client was living with his mother and had a history of various criminal offenses. At one point client's step-father called police and filed a restraining order against him. When police interviewed the mother, she reported that the defendant had tried to strangle her two weeks prior. A Dangerous Hearing was held since the District Attorney believed defendant was too dangerous to be considered for bail. Attorney Barabino argued for release and was successful. The case moved to trial. At trial, the lack of available witnesses for the prosecution resulted in Attorney Barabino requesting and receiving a dismissal.
RESULT: RELEASED at Dangerousness Hearing 58A and ALL CHARGES DISMISSED AT TRIAL.

Assault and Battery Charges, Strangulation, ALL CHARGES DISMISSED, PROBATION REINSTATED WITH NO IMPOSITION OF TWO YEAR SUSPENDED SENTENCE

May 21th 2015
Assault and Battery Chapter
Assault and Battery Chapter
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon
Strangulation or Suffocation
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon
Client had been on probation when he was charged with the above offenses. The Commonwealth sought to invoke a No Bail “58A” detention prior to trial. The probation department also sought a detainer to hold him without bail. He wasn’t going anywhere, and on Attorney Barabino's advice, he advised client not to challenge the hold prior to any trial. The reason not to challenge it was because he would not be successful and it could preserve testimonial evidence against him at trial. That advice proved essential since at trial the Commonwealth was unable to prove their case with the evidence they had. The District Attorney sought a second trial date to obtain prison phone calls. Once that proved unsuccessful, at another trial date, a dismissal of all charges was obtained. The court declined to invoke the suspended sentence on the probation matter. Client was given a very short jail term and will be released within 4-6 weeks, with no convictions.
RESULT: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED. Probation Reinstated with NO IMPOSITION OF TWO-YEAR SUSPENDED SENTENCE.