Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

According to an article in the Melrose Patch, eleven people were arrested and charged with various Massachusetts Drug Crimes including Trafficking Cocaine Over 200 Grams. Ten of the individuals are from Massachusetts. The investigation began in March. Official were looking into activities of a Boston North End man who was alleged to have run the drug network. He allegedly dealt out of an accomplice's apartment in Boston and Revere. In June Search Warrants were obtained resulting in the seizure of over five hundred grams of cocaine and seventy five thousand dollars cash. The article and the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office press release identify the following defendants: Gerald Esposito of Boston, Steven Tracia of Revere, Kettia Piris of Revere, Anthony Giannetti of Revere, Adam Saggese of Melrose, Marino Velasquez of Revere, Anthony Vigorito of Boston, Ferdinando Daniele of Revere, Anthony Ascenzo of Boston, Salvatore Lazzari of Winthrop and Paul Mattarese of Maine. Charges range and vary from defendant to defendant and include Conspiracy to Violate the Controlled Substances Laws, Trafficking Over 100 Grams of Cocaine, Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana, Possession of Cocaine, Trafficking Over 200 Grams of Cocaine, Conspiracy to Distribute Oxycodone and more. The cases are being prosecuted in the Suffolk Superior Court.

Read Article:

Suffolk County Massachusetts Drug Crimes Defense Lawyer

In cases like this rarely do all eleven defendants go to trial. Many of the defendants are charged with crimes that do not contemplate mandatory minimum sentences. Depending on their records they may be able to resolve the case with probation or perhaps a continuance without a finding. All of this depends of course on the extent of their involvement in the operation. The defendants facing Drug Trafficking Charges are in a more difficult predicament. They will either have to get the items seized suppressed, plea bargain their cases down to something less than the crime with which they are charged or go to trial. In cases like this there are almost always varying levels of culpability from defendant to defendant. Each defendant's defense will be unique and there is always the risk of finger pointing. Sometimes one of the defendants, usually one who possesses substantial information about the operation and a lesser amount of culpability with cooperate with the prosecution against the others. I expect you will see lots of evidentiary motions filed in this case. I also expect that one by one these cases will be resolved leaving one or two left to go to trial. These cases also become a managerial nightmare for judges and court staffs. It is nearly impossible to get eleven criminal defense lawyers together for hearings, motions, status conferences and related court appearances.

Sometimes in larger cases you see a lawyer representing more than one defendant. Rarely is this a good idea. At a minimum I believe it is necessary to consult with your own lawyer. Oftentimes conflicts of interest arise as cases progress making the representation of multiple parties controversial. These conflicts may not be apparent at the time of arraignment or when the initial discovery materials are produced. However, once they become evident you can be at risk if you and someone with a competing defense had the same criminal attorney.

Continue reading "Eleven Arrested, Ten From Massachusetts After Local Cocaine Drug Trafficking Investigation Yields Over 500 Grams, Conspiracy Charges Filed" »

Yesterday Richard Conley of Framingham, Massachusetts was arraigned on charges that he was in Possession of Child Pornography and for Distribution of Child Pornography. The charges stem from an investigation that started in July and that was conducted by the Massachusetts State police. The article in the Metrowest Daily News states that the investigating officer was searching the internet for these illicit images and used a program to determine the origin of download for the materials. The results suggested to the officer that Conley's computer was the source of the photos. At the arraignment hearing prosecutors offered that when confronted with the allegations Conley denied having any computers. He further denied using peer-to-peer file sharing programs. A Search Warrant was applied for and granted. Officers raided Conley's home and found a laptop with a large quantity of Child Porn on it. He was released on a modest bail. Right now charges are pending in the Framingham District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

I very often I have clients retaining me on Distribution of Child Pornography Cases in Massachusetts. Those who did in fact download the illicit material, either deliberately or inadvertently, are baffled when they are charged with distribution. They make clear that they never distributed the material to anyone and that a forensic examination of their computer will prove this. Well, what they do not know is that by accessing the material through file sharing programs or peer-to-peer networking they are in fact in violation of the Massachusetts and Federal Child Pornography Distribution laws. Now how can that be? File sharing as we know it today started with Napster, about ten or twelve years ago. Researchers believe that there may be as many as eighty million people in the United States who use file sharing programs in some way or another.

Peer-to-peer file sharing or P2P permits people to download files, games, music videos and more from other computers that are connected or "peers". What happens however is that now others can access that material from your computer. For legal purpose, at least right now, that constitutes distribution in Massachusetts and in Federal Court.

So what are some defenses to cases like this one? Certainly the defendant's intent can be argued to a jury. That a person intended to download only or simply "possess" the material is a decision that the jury can make. After all, distribution must be made knowingly. If the district attorney cannot prove that the person using a peer-to-peer program knew that his actions constituted distribution then an acquittal might be possible. Proving knowledge rests on many factors that may or may not be present in Conley's case. What experience did he have with computers? This can be determined not only from the testimony of witnesses who are aware of his proficiency but also from an examination of his hard drive. What is actually on the hard drive? Was the defendant selling this material online? Was he engaged in chats that alerted people to the location of this material? Remember that the article states only that the state trooper conducting the investigation learned that Conley was downloading the materials. The forensic report for the hard drive in this case will answer many of these questions and to some extent guide the defense efforts.

Continue reading "Framingham Massachusetts Man Faces Possession, Distribution Of Child Pornography Charges After Images Found On His Computer" »

Cynthia Vaughn has been charged with Larceny Over $250, Conflict of Interest and Filing a False Claim in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem, Massachusetts. The charges stem from allegations that Vaughn, who was working for the Andover, Massachusetts water treatment plant was falsely submitting records for hours worked while running a business on the side. Now Vaughn is seeking to suppress statements she made to police officers who investigated the case. According to a report in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune on May 5, 2010 five Andover police officers went into her office. They brought her into the water treatment plant's conference room to be questioned. She was advised that an investigation was being conducted on behalf of the town manager and that there were potentially criminal allegations. Vaughn invoked her right to counsel until she was assured that she was not the target of any criminal investigation. The investigation they said only had to do with the treatment plant superintendent. Vaughn's Suppression Motion challenges the voluntariness of her statements. She claims among other things exploitation of an anxiety condition, trickery and deceit.

Read Article:

Essex County Criminal Defense Lawyers

This article states that Vaughn is challenging the voluntariness of the waiver of her constitutional rights. She claims that the waiver of Miranda was not made knowingly, intelligently or voluntarily. The challenge here focuses on Vaughn's emotional stability, her lack of experience with the legal system, her mental condition at the time of the interview, improper inducements prompting her to waive her constitutional right to silence and aspects of the police practice (i.e. five officers coming into her work place) and their false assurances. Both Massachusetts and Federal case law make clear that specific challenges such as this could, in certain instances warrant suppression. More importantly, Vaughn has protected herself by hiring an excellent criminal defense attorney. There is no better criminal defense lawyer in Massachusetts than Larry McGuire. His commitment to defending the accused is unparalleled and his results are excellent.

I will forever continue to reiterate that nothing good comes from talking to the police. Police officers, particularly detectives have specific reasons for talking to someone. Their questions are thought out in advance. Their questions are designed to elicit specific responses. They do not question people simply for informational purposes. They usually have an abundance of information that leads them to the person they seek to interrogate. They do not share that information with the person they are interviewing. Rather, they use it to get additional information. Most people who get convicted do so because they spoke with law enforcement personnel. You do not have to do this. You never have to speak with police officers. As a matter of fact, no one in this state should ever speak with the police before consulting with a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer. Knowing your rights and properly exercising them can save you from a criminal prosecution. The percentage of people who get charged with a crime simply because they spoke with the police is staggering. Do not do it without first consulting a lawyer.

If you are in trouble you need a lawyer. When hiring a lawyer make sure you hire someone who has a significant amount of experience. You should always contact a criminal lawyer when your constitutional rights are at stake. Waiving a constitutional right prior to obtaining legal advice is never a good idea.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Woman Charged With Felony Larceny Files Motion To Suppress Statements Claiming Andover Cops Violated Constitutional Rights" »

This past Tuesday shortly after the lunch recess a dangerousness hearing was being conducted at the Lawrence District Court. The courtroom doors opened abruptly and a police officer sitting in the courtroom observed Stephanie Urena trying to hold Keila Rodriguez to prevent her from testifying. Urena, a Chelsea, Massachusetts resident was grabbing the witness and pulling her back. The Lawrence Eagle Tribune reports that Rodriguez was attempting to testify on behalf of her boyfriend. Urena and Rodriguez were separated by police officers. Officers then attempted to interview Urena and were interrupted by a lawyer advising Urena not to talk to the police. The report states that the lawyer represents Rodriguez's ex-boyfriend, the defendant in the dangerousness hearing. Urena denied that the man was her lawyer and denied knowing the lawyer. Urena has been charged with Intimidation of a Witness and Assault and Battery.

Read Article:

Lawrence Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer

This article brings up an interesting issue that Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyers frequently face, that being conflicts of interest. So what exactly is a conflict of interest in the legal sense? Well, for one thing, representing more than on defendant in a criminal matter can in some instances create this problem. Both Massachusetts and United States Supreme Court cases have held that representing codefendants at the same trial can at times result in a detriment to one of the parties that constitutes a violation of the Sixth Amendment and warrants reversal of a conviction. These cases go on to say that both the Massachusetts and United States Constitutions mandate that an attorney give his undivided loyalty to his client. If an actual conflict of interest is shown there might be no need to show a loss of a substantial defense and a conviction might be reversed.

Conflicts of interest might implicate problems for the lawyer as well as the client. The Massachusetts Rules of Professional Responsibility make clear that an attorney's loyalty to his client is essential to the lawyer's relationship to a client. These rules further state that ordinarily a lawyer in a criminal case should decline to act for more than one codefendant. Common representation is permissible where interests are similar and the risks of adverse impact to one client are minimal. Representing codefendants is a somewhat of a slippery undertaking. Conflicting defenses often arise as defense preparation and investigative efforts develop. The better practice is not to represent codefendants and to suggest to one of the accused that he or she retain their own lawyer.

So where does that leave this case? From a purely legal standpoint it is difficult to find the existence of an actual conflict between the defendant and Urena. They are not actually codefendants. Rather, Urena is a witness on the defendant's dangerousness matter and now she is a defendant on another criminal matter linked to the dangerousness matter. However, the fact that she denied that this lawyer represented her (if this is in fact what she said) might be problematic and could be viewed as an intention to obstruct the police officers' investigation. Hopefully this person's zealousness will not be viewed this as obstructive.

Continue reading "Disturbance At Lawrence Massachusetts Courthouse Leads To Arrest Of Chelsea Woman" »

Back in 1993 Herbert Racine, now forty three years old, was convicted of one count of Rape. He was ultimately classified as a Level 2 Sex Offender by the Massachusetts Sex Offender Registry Board. It is now alleged that Racine committed an Indecent Assault and Battery on a Person Over the Age of Fourteen and that he has committed the crime of Enticing a Minor. The details of the incident as reported in the Lowell Sun are scant. The victim is between the ages of fourteen and sixteen and the gender of the victim was not identified. Racine is also being charged with Failing to Register as a Sex Offender and an unrelated Assault and Battery case. The cases are pending in the Ayer District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Sex Crimes Defense Law Firm

The laws in Massachusetts for Failing to Register as a Sex Offender are very strict. In essence, anyone who after 1981 was convicted of a designated sex offense must register. The word conviction included adjudications of delinquent and adjudications of being a sexually dangerous person. The offenses triggering the requirement of registration include rape, assault with the intent to rape, indecent assault and battery, kidnapping a child, enticing a minor into prostitution or for sexual intercourse, drugging persons for sexual intercourse, inducing a minor into prostitution, sharing or living off of the earnings of a minor prostitute, possession and distribution of child pornography, engaging in unnatural acts and more. Level two and level three sex offenders are obligated to register at the police department in the city or town where they live.

The penalties for violating this law are severe. For first time offenders, there is a minimum six month house of correction sentence and up to five years in state prison. For second and subsequent violators of this law there is a minimum mandatory five year state prison sentence. Hiring an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer is always advisable for anyone who is charged with a crime, particularly where there is a minimum mandatory sentence associated with the crimes charged.

So what exactly does this mean for Racine? Well, the article does not provide much detail however I would expect that the minor victims in this case have been and will continue to be cooperative with the district attorney. If not then the case probably would not have gotten this far to begin with. Also, since this case is being prosecuted in Middlesex County I expect an indictment to issue and the prosecution to be handled in the Superior Court in either Woburn or Lowell. While at times Massachusetts prosecutors might exercise restraint in terms of the aggressiveness with which they pursue the accused, they are less likely to do so when the defendant is a repeat offender and the victim is a minor. Also, the fact that Racine failed to register as a sex offender and has an outstanding complaint for a Massachusetts Violent Crime leads me to believe that this case will not be prosecuted in Ayer for very long.

Continue reading "Convicted, Registered Massachusetts Sex Offender Held Without Bail On Charges Of Indecent Assault And Battery, Enticing A Minor In Ayer" »

Lawrence, Massachusetts police along with North Shore Gang Task Force officers had been conducting an investigation into a local Cocaine Distribution Operation. A confidential informant conducted controlled Cocaine Buys from Jose Ramos, a forty six year old Lawrence man. Also present and allegedly involved in at least two of the deals was Jose Robles, also from Lawrence. Three total sales were reported in all, two taking place last month and one this past Sunday. During the last deal Robles drove Ramos to a designated location to consummate the deal. Realizing that the police were watching Ramos threw the money into an alley. Both men were arrested. Ramos then waived his Miranda Rights and spoke to the police. He admitted to being a middle man in a local drug trade. He would receive orders and contact Robles who would bring him the drugs. Both men have been charged with Trafficking Cocaine, Distribution of Cocaine and a School Zone Violation. The case is now pending in the Lawrence District Court but may be presented to a grand jury and prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court .

Read Article:

Lawrence Massachusetts Cocaine Trafficking Defense Laywer

Miranda Rights have been in force since 1966 following the case of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 486 (1966). That case conferred on a criminal suspect the right to be warned of certain constitutional rights prior to a custodial interrogation. Statements taken in violation of the Miranda Rights are inadmissible at trial as is the evidence located as a result of the violation. Miranda warnings require the following advisement: that prior to an interrogation the person has the right to remain silent, that anything he says will be use against him in court, that he has the right to consult with and attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning and that if he is indigent an attorney will be provided to him at no cost.

These rights were conveyed to Ramos. But what did he do? He waived those rights and decided to talk to the cops. And how did that work out for him? Not well. Here is why. Ramos is now charged with the same crimes as is Robles. What is worse for him however is that he admitted to having committed the crimes of Trafficking Cocaine, a School Zone Violation and Distribution of Cocaine. He would not necessarily have been found guilty of these crimes absent his admission. What else happened to Ramos? He got his name in the paper, not only for having committed these crimes, not only for having admitted to having committed these crimes but also for implicating his buddy Robles in these crimes. Guess what folks? This is why we have constitutional rights. To avoid putting yourself in a worse position than you were already in and to ensure an ability to defend yourself against accusations that might not be accurate. Ramos did not help himself by cooperating without the police. As I have stated in several previous blog posts, no one ever talks himself out of criminal charges. Talking to the cops only gets you in more trouble. Anyone in this situation should avail himself of his constitutional rights and Hire a Massachusetts Drug Crimes Defense Lawyer. Certainly Ramos should have.

Continue reading "Lawrence Massachusetts Police Investigating Cocaine Distribution Operation Arrest Two, Trafficking And Distribution Charges Filed" »

Ken Morgan of Middleboro, Massachusetts was arrested and charged with Possession With the Intent to Distribute Marijuana, a Class D substance. He was charged with Cultivation of Marijuana as well. According to a report in the Brockton Enterprise police executed a search warrant at Morgan's Cherry Street residence. Inside they found seventy five small plants growing. Outside on the property police located several six foot tall plants. The police also located irrigation, lighting and fertilization systems used to grow the plants. Charges are pending in the Wareham District Court.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x227168708/Pot-farm-busted-in-Middleboro

Massachusetts Marijuana Cultivation Defense Lawyer

Cultivation of marijuana is not the most popular of the drug crimes in Massachusetts in terms of prosecutions. The reasons are simple. The climate in this part of the country is not as conducive to growing the drug. Nor for that matter is there adequacy privacy to do so without risking detection. Growing marijuana, particularly for distribution purposes requires among other things light, air and a moderate temperature. Rich soil and a nearby water source are necessary was well. This combination of factors is not easy to come by in eastern Massachusetts.

Growing marijuana indoors presents problems for the growers that often leads to arrest and prosecution. Thermal Infrared Imaging devices can detect difference in temperature that might alert law enforcement officials to illicit cultivation activities particularly where they are targeting a particular suspect. However, about ten years ago in the case of Kyllo v. United States, the United State Supreme Court held that the use of a thermal imaging device in certain situations constituted a search. Under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution such a search requires law enforcement to obtain a Search Warrant. Another factor that might trigger an investigation into marijuana cultivation activities are unusually high utility bills. Unusually large purchases of fertilizer might prompt an investigation into Marijuana Cultivation activities. Suspicious neighbors alerted to excessive traffic at a home also factors into police efforts.

So what is Morgan looking at? A lot depends on just how defensible this case is. If there was no probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant suppression might be viable. As I have mentioned in the past, suppression often if not usually leads to a dismissal of the charges. If Morgan does not have a criminal record certainly probation and perhaps a reduction of the charges to a misdemeanor is possible. A continuance without a finding would not be outside of the realm of possibility either. Keep in mind that rarely do first time offenders get criminal records for first time marijuana charges, especially where the quantity is less than the trafficking threshold.

Continue reading "Cops Bust Up Marijuana Farm In Wareham Massachusetts, Man Charged With Cultivation, Possession With Intent To Distribute Marijuana" »

The Metrowest Daily News reports that Kelly Temple and Shay Lund, two women who lived in a Hudson, Massachusetts apartment have been charged with Trafficking Cocaine Over 28 Grams, Possession of Cocaine, Possession With the Intent to Distribute Cocaine and Conspiracy. As part of an ongoing investigation the police obtained a Search Warrant permitting them to enter and search the women's Lake Street apartment. During the search officers found scales, cutting agents, packaging materials, crib sheets, cash and over twenty eight grams of cocaine. It is alleged that these materials were inside of a closet in the bedroom the two shared. Temple was present at the time of the execution of the search warrant. Lund was found in a nearby bar. She was carrying bags of cocaine consistent with an intention to sell. She has been charged with a School Zone Violation as well. The cases are pending in the Marlboro District Court. It is likely that these cases will be indicted and prosecuted in the Middlesex County Superior Court in Woburn. There is a minimum mandatory five year state prison sentence associated with the trafficking charges.

Read Article:

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/police_and_fire/x227168440/Police-charge-two-women-with-cocaine-trafficking-in-Hudson

As is typically the case in Search Warrant matters, Temple and Lund's defenses will focus on the integrity of the police investigation. Police need probable cause to obtain and execute a search warrant. Inasmuch as the details in this article are scant it is safe to assume that much of their investigation centered on assistance from an informant. For the warrant to survive constitutional scrutiny the informant must have a basis of knowledge to conclude that the controlled substances would be where he claimed they would be. He must also be deemed reliable. This is often referred to as the Aguilar-Spinelli test. Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyers frequently mount challenges to these searches by showing a judge that the informant lacked the requisite basis of knowledge or the he or she was not reliable. Successful challenges usually result in suppression of the drugs seized and ultimately a dismissal of the criminal charges.

One of the things that interests me here is the layout of the Lake Street apartment. The article suggests that Lund and Temple shared a room. However it also states that Lund lived in Rhode Island and that the Temple was the tenant in the apartment. Was this a one bedroom apartment? If so, what evidence suggests that the two shared the room. If the challenge to the issuance of the search warrant fails it looks at first blush like these two have competing, conflicting defenses that might result in an acquittal of the trafficking charge as to one or the other.

Continue reading "Two Women In Hudson Massachusetts Charged With Trafficking After Cops Find Over 28 Grams Of Cocaine During Search Of Apartment" »

The Lynn Item reports that William Townsend of Lynn, Massachusetts has been charged with Assault With the Intent to Commit Murder, Rape and Assault and Battery by Means of a Dangerous Weapon. The charges follow a weekend where the complainant, Townsend's former girlfriend fell off the wagon and engaged in a lengthy partying binge.

The police responded to a call for Domestic Violence at an undisclosed address. When they arrived they found the complainant barefoot in the rain. She purportedly displayed bruises described as both old and new. She told the police that Townsend tried to throw her out of a window on the second floor. She was eventually taken to a local hospital. There she told attending personnel that Townsend had repeatedly raped her. Meanwhile, back at the scene police went up to the second floor, kicked the door in and arrested Townsend.

The complainant told police that she had been sober for fourteen months and that she fell off the wagon this past Friday. She met up with friends and family and began drinking heavily. She then went to visit Townsend who was apparently her first boyfriend. There, she continued drinking with the defendant. On Monday evening the woman reported that Townsend demanded the two have sex. Having AIDS she declined. The two continued to drink for several more hours, passing out. The next day Townsend continued to demand sex. The woman again declined and Townsend passed out yet again. She claims that when she went to wake him up Townsend grabbed her, smashed her head against a wall and threatened to throw her out of the second floor window. He threw her out of the apartment and the police were called. Charges are now pending in the Lynn District Court

Read Article:

Lynn Massachusetts Rape Defense Lawyer

Any Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer will tell you that cases like this often enjoy a multitude of defenses. Think about this from a purely factual standpoint. The complainant's credibility is suspect from the start. She started drinking on Friday and continued until she passed out on Monday night. Just how much of that weekend could she have remembered with any degree of detail? She claims that Townsend demanded sex and raped her notwithstanding the fact that she has AIDS. How many people are willing to risk contracting a deadly disease? Now think about the independent corroborating evidence in this case. What do the hospital records show? Did the two in fact have sex? Was the bruising both new and old as characterized by the police? How about the complainant's head. Were there bruises or cuts corroborative of her account of having her head smashed into the wall. Remember that Mr. Townsend's account of the weekend is probably much different than the woman's. Defense lawyers rarely share the details of their defense at an arraignment. If bail was set in the amount of three thousand dollars as stated in the article then the judge probably got a good read on the viability of these charges. It would not surprise me to see this case remain in the district court.

Continue reading "Lynn Massachusetts Man Accused Of Rape, Assault With Intent To Murder, Assault And Battery With A Dangerous Weapon After Weekend Drinking Binge" »

A sixty three year old Braintree, Massachusetts man was charged in 2009 with thirty one counts of Possession of Child Pornography and Distribution of Child Pornography according to a report in the Quincy Patriot Ledger. The man, Francis Austin's competency became an issue resulting in a two year delay of the case. It is alleged that Austin's involvement in these acts was first detected by authorities in California who alerted Massachusetts officials to the activity. A Search Warrant was obtained for Austin's home. His computer was seized and on it investigators located the illicit materials. The case is being prosecuted in the Norfolk County Superior Court.

Read Article:

http://www.patriotledger.com/news/cops_and_courts/x948304417/Braintree-man-faces-child-pornography-charges

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

There are times when a prospective client will "suggest" to me that he is incompetent to stand trial. They become disappointed very quickly when I explain to them the law on competency to stand trial in Massachusetts and the consequences of employing that approach. The test in Massachusetts for determining the competency of a person to stand trial is simple. The accused must have sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and he must have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against him. Challenges to competency to stand trial are governed by statute, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 123 Section 15. That statute essentially works like this. At any time a judge can order a defendant to be evaluated for competency to stand trial. The defendant will then be examined by a qualified psychologist. The defendant can also be sent out for a twenty day period of observation. The time can be extended to forty days if necessary. At the end of the observation and evaluation period there will be a hearing on the issue of competency. If the judge finds that the defendant is not competent to stand trial then the case will be continued until he is ready to stand trial. So, as I tell my clients, they will most likely have to face the charges at some point. Until they do so they will be incarcerated, likely in the Bridgewater State Hospital, waiting for a determination that they are competent to stand trial. This is probably what happened to Austin. He was indicted in 2009. A challenge to his competency was made. The case was delayed and now he is competent to face the Child Pornography charges.

In sum, challenging a defendant's competency to stand trial is not a defense to a crime. It merely delays the prosecution. There will be a strong likelihood that during the delay the defendant will be incarcerated in a treatment facility. Eventually he will be in court defending the charges.

Continue reading "Braintree Massachusetts Man Charged With Possession Of Child Pornography, Distribution Of Child Pornography " »

Paul Teves was an eleventh grade school teacher working at the West Bridgewater High School. He also coached track. Now the thirty five year old stands charged with Distribution of Child Pornography in the Federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts. According to a report in the Brockton Enterprise, Teves used a screen name and described himself as a mother willing to pimp out her eleven year old daughter. Chats were either monitored or seized wherein Teves communicated with someone from Albuquerque who, once arrested cooperated and led officials to Teves. Teves was interviewed by investigating FBI agents. He admitted exchanging videos and stills of Child Pornography with others. It appears that Teves is not currently in custody.
The statute under which Teves is being prosecuted is likely 18 U.S.C. §2252. That law states that anyone who receives or distributes material that involves this use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and that depicts such conduct is guilty of a felony. A conviction of this offense is punishable by a minimum mandatory five year prison sentence.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

Investigating these cases is often difficult and frustrating for law enforcement. People who engage in this type of conduct often do so from their homes. The mere fact that several people can live in one home and share the same IP address makes identifying the actual perpetrator difficult. Even if a person lives alone law enforcement officials know that unsecured IP addresses can be accessed by neighbors. Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyers can exploit this fact when filing Motions to Suppress unlawful Searches and Seizures. While identifying the source or origin of the illicit activity may be easy, putting a suspect's fingerprints on the keyboard is a much more difficult task. More often than not law enforcement agencies solidify their cases when they contact the suspect and get him or her to talk. The accused usually panics talk to the authorities. They think they can minimize the damage by admitting to wrongdoing and being cooperative. They are wrong. I have been practicing criminal law for over twenty four years and never once have I had a client who "talked his way out" of a criminal problem. The police are skilled at asking questions. The questions are designed to elicit certain answers. Once they get those answers their case strengthens. Also, rarely does a client come into my office, look at a police report and tell me "that is exactly what I said to them". The response is almost always "that is not what I said". This is why I always advise clients to say nothing and hire a lawyer. Lawyers are paid to protect you and to make sure that you do not jeopardize your legal rights by acting foolishly or on impulse.

Continue reading "West Bridgewater Massachusetts Teacher, Coach Charged With Distribution Of Child Pornography In Federal Court, Faces Minimum Mandatory Sentence" »