Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

Massachusetts Legislature Moving to Ban Synthetic Drug "Bath Salts" as Usage is on the Rise

2012-02-03T17:11:02Z

According to an article in the Brockton Enterprise, Senator John Keenan from Quincy has authored legislation that would ban "bath salts" in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Senate agreed upon the bill yesterday. If enacted, the law would make it illegal for stores to sell what is now an over-the-counter substance sold for purportedly lawful purposes. Bath salts contain methylenedixoypyrovalerone, a stimulant that has an effect on the central nervous system. At this time this substance is not illegal to sell or buy, at least in Massachusetts and it is available in convenience stores and smoke shops. It can also be ordered online. The federal government is in the process of making this product illegal nationally.

So what exactly does this drug do to you? According to Web MD bath salts cause "agitation, paranoia, hallucinations, chest pain and suicidalilty". The drug is a stimulant, much like methamphetamine or cocaine. There is one significant difference. Bath salts produce the side effect of hallucinations. This drug is also associated with hypertension, increased heart rate, aggressive behavior and at times extreme violence. There is a split of authority as to whether this substance is addictive. Authorities have warned that abusing bath salts can result in permanent brain damage. It is universally agreed that taking this substance is dangerous, toxic and potentially lethal. There is no medicinal value associated with bath salts. This is a very dangerous drug. Using it is not only dangerous to the user but it can lead to the commission of crimes.

Right now in Massachusetts Criminal Lawyers are waiting for this law to pass and to determine the effects possessing and distributing bath salts will have on the accused. Will there be a minimum mandatory sentence associated with its use or sale? How will the state law compare to the inevitable federal law that will ultimately pass? How will Massachusetts bath salt laws be viewed relative to similar laws already having passed in other states? Perhaps most interesting is just how will use of this drug effect defenses in Massachusetts Criminal Cases? Right now there is a case being tried in Pennsylvania wherein a woman was charged with Theft Crimes she claims were the result of bath salt intoxication. The woman and her boyfriend are alleged to have stolen electronic equipment and jewelry at a home they broke into. The couple was charged with Receiving Stolen Property and Larceny. In Massachusetts a Criminal Lawyer might defend on the theory that the drug intoxication prevented the defendant from forming the requisite criminal intent needed to sustain a conviction. It is important that once this law passes anyone in Massachusetts who gets charged with a "bath salt" relate crime immediately contact a lawyer who is experience in defending drug cases of all types in Massachusetts. The law, as with any law, might be subject to a constitutional challenge, particularly where the substance is one that is not currently criminalized in this state.

Read Article:

Lawyers Who Defend Drug Crime Activity in Massachusetts

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman is always defending drug cases in Massachusetts and throughout the country. You can always reach us by calling 617-263-6800 or by sending us an email. It is never too late to hire a good lawyer but the earlier you start your defense the better your chances of success. Do not wait. Call us now.

Methuen Massachusetts Man Arrested After Motor Vehicle Stop, Charged With Probation Violation, Held on Various Theft Crimes

2012-02-02T16:03:46Z

Last week Herman Rodriguez of Methuen, Massachusetts was driving his car ninety-two miles per hour on Route 495. The posted speed limit is sixty-five miles per hour. A state police office pulled Rodriguez over and was taken to the local state police barracks. Rodriguez identified himself as Kelvin Caraballo-Ostolaza and had a New York driver's license in that name. During the booking process a fingerprint scan alerted the police to Rodriguez's true identity. The United States Marshall's Office confirmed that Rodriguez was wanted on a Probation Violation. He was on probation for a Federal Drug Trafficking conviction. Rodriguez had been in default for six years. It was also determined that Rodriguez has an outstanding matter where he has been charged with Possession of Burglarious Tools and Malicious Destruction to Property over $250, a felony. Based on the Motor Vehicle incident last week charges of False Name to a Police Officer have been filed in the Newburyport District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Probation Violation Defense Lawyer

Massachusetts Federal Drug Trafficking Defense Lawyer

We frequently represent people accused of violating their probation. When this happens, the defendant is served with a surrender notice. He must appear in court and a Surrender Hearing is scheduled. These hearings are much less formal than trials however the consequences associated with Probation Violations can be significant. The accused is looking at an extension of probation and in some cases a jail or prison sentence up the maximum permitted by the statute for the offense for which the defendant is on probation. This makes it imperative that the defendant facing a Probation Violation Hearing in Massachusetts hire an experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer. In Massachusetts the law states that probation may be revoked after a Surrender Hearing if the prosecution establishes to a reasonable degree of certainty that the defendant has violated one or more of the terms of his or her probation. The violation must occur during the probationary period and not after. So, for instance, if someone is charged with violating probation and the hearing occurs after the probation was to terminate, then only the court can consider only the acts of the defendant prior to that termination date. Keep in mind that not every probation violation requires probation revocation. Sometimes the violations alleged or minor or unintentional. These can often be addressed without a formal hearing. At Probation Surrender Hearings judge determine first, whether the conditions of probation have been violated and second, whether in fact probation should be revoked. The first determination is fact based. The second is discretionary. Way too many judges in Massachusetts are inclined to revoke probation after a violation is found making it extremely important that you hire a lawyer who is prepared to fight for you and has a good understanding of the history of your case. A strong presentation against probation revocation can be the difference between you remaining free or being committed to serve your sentence in jail.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman has been defending the accused in probation matters throughout the state for twenty four yours. If you are facing a probation violation hearing your need a good lawyer. We can help you. Call us now at 617-263-6800 or email us. We want to start preparing for your probation surrender hearing right now.

Five Men Arrested in Lowell Massachusetts and Charged With Indecent Exposure After Getting Caught Urinating in Public

2012-01-31T17:45:07Z

This past weekend Lowell, Massachusetts police were running a "downtown disorder detail". Between the hours of midnight and 2:00 a.m. they arrested five local men, four of whom are accused of urinating in public. The fifth is alleged to have been walking on a downtown street with his genitals exposed. Here is what has been reported. The first man was seen urinating in a doorway on Merrimack Street just before 1:00 a.m. The second man was caught peeing near Merrimack and John Streets. This was at about 1:20 a.m. The third man was seen urinating on the door of a local shrine less than one half hour later. The last man, a Dracut resident was found relieving himself in a downtown parking lot. All five men have been charged with Indecent Exposure. The cases are being prosecuted in the Lowell District Court.

Read Article:

Lawyer Who Defend Sex Offenses and Crimes in Massachusetts

Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts is a misdemeanor. The law provides a maximum sentence of six months in the jail or a two hundred dollar fine. The statute, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 53 states verbatim that "[c]ommon night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of not more than $200, or by both such fine and imprisonment.". Massachusetts case law has held that to be convicted of Indecent Exposure the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed an intentional act of lewd exposure and that the act was offensive to one or more persons. An essential element of Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts is the exposure of genitalia. Exposure of pubic hair ironically does not satisfy the statute. Exposure of one's buttocks does fit within the definition of Indecent Exposure in Massachusetts.

Usually cases like this one get resolved by way of dismissal with court costs. In some cases pre-trial probation will be ordered. That means that the accused will be on some sort of probation, usually something informal that included community service or fees. Once the probationary term ends the case will be dismissed in its entirety provided that the defendant has complied with the conditions of probation. If he or she fails to honor the imposed obligations then the district attorney has the right to prosecute the case. If the defendants in this case do not have criminal records I imagine that one of these two forms of disposition will result. This is a situation where it is important that your Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer have the experience necessary to get you the best result possible.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman has been defending the accused in Massachusetts for over twenty four years. We defend all types of crimes including Sex Crimes in Massachusetts and Indecent Exposure. Call us at 617-263-6800 or email us if you need a lawyer. We are prepared to help you.

Essex County Drug Task Force Investigation Results in Arrests of Four Lawrence Massachusetts Residents, Gun and Drug Charges Filed

2012-01-27T13:59:05Z

Members of the Essex County Drug Task Force concluded an investigation into illegal drug activities of four Lawrence, Massachusetts men. The result was Drug and Gun Charges. Apparently the investigation was initiated by a hand to hand sale of drugs by an man named Amado Colon to an undercover official. Once Colon was arrested a Search Warrant was obtained and his Morton Street home was searched. During the search officers located enough heroin to justify the filing of Cocaine Trafficking Charges and Possession of a Firearm. Colon has also been charged with a School Zone Violation and Possession with the Intent to Distribute Heroin. The investigation also resulted in the arrests of three other Lawrence, Massachusetts men. Pedro Berroa was charged with Trafficking Over 28 Grams of Heroin, Conspiracy and a School Zone Violation. Luige Cabrera was charged with Conspiracy, a School Zone Violation and Trafficking Over 28 Grams of Heroin. Laura Cabrera was charged with Selling Drug Paraphernalia, Trafficking Heroin, a School Zone Violation and Conspiracy. The cases will ultimately be prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem. Bail for the defendants ranged from fifteen thousand dollars to one hundred fifty thousand dollars.

Read Article:

Essex County Drug Defense Lawyer

One of my clients recently asked me a very simple question that as a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer I often take for granted. He wanted to know just what is meant by "conspiracy". Almost every person charged with a Drug Case in Massachusetts faces a count for Conspiracy. The legal definition for Conspiracy in Massachusetts is a combination of more than one person, acting together in some fashion with the intention of accomplishing a criminal objective or two or more people acting with criminal means to accomplish something that is not necessarily itself criminal in nature. One Massachusetts Criminal Case stated that "conspiracy as a criminal offence is established when the object of the combination is either a crime, or if not a crime, is unlawful, or when the means contemplated are either criminal, or if not criminal, are illegal, provided that, where no crime is contemplated either as the end or the means, the illegal but non-criminal element involves prejudice to the general welfare or oppression of the individual of sufficient gravity to be injurious to the public interest."

We typically see a common pattern of facts when someone is charged with Conspiracy only. That person is usually present when others are either using, selling, possessing, possessing with the intent to sell, trafficking, manufacturing, cutting, guarding or buying drugs. The police lack probable cause to charge this person with a substantive offense, i.e. possession or distribution of the drug. But, their belief is that since the person was present at the scene of the crime, and somehow associated with the drug dealers, he or she is conspiring with that person and will be charged with a crime. It is very likely that in these circumstances, an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer will succeed in getting that charge, particularly if it is the only charge, dismissed against his client.

]]> Our office has had great success defending Drug Cases in Massachusetts for over twenty years. If you call us we will be happy to discuss your case with you. Our number is 617-263-6800. You can also email us. We respond to all inquiries. Call now to start your defense.

Massachusetts Appeals Court Reverses Drug Conviction Holding That Trial Judge Refused to Allow Defendant to Raise Entrapment, Coercion Defense

2012-01-25T18:03:42Z

Yesterday the Massachusetts Appeals Court issued its opinion in Commonwealth v. Podgurski, 10-P-2135 holding that the trial judge committed reversible error when she refused to permit the defense to offer its entrapment defense and refused to instruct the jury on the issue. The facts in Podgurski are as follows. In September of 2005 Brockton Police began watching the defendant's home. On October 5, 2005 an informant arranged a meeting between the defendant and an undercover police officer. This occurred at the defendant's home. At that time Podgurski sold Percocets to the undercover officer. The next day another controlled buy was arranged, again at the defendant's home. Surveillance watched the house during the deal. Shortly thereafter Podgurski left his home by car. He was stopped. He was arrested. The car was searched. A significant weight of drugs was found in the car. More than enough to support a trafficking indictment. A Search Warrant was obtained and Podgurski's home was searched. More drugs were found as was some Drug Paraphernalia. The defendant testified that on the date of his arrest a man who knew through a drug related acquaintance came to his home and gave him Oxycontin and Percocets. Podgurski tried to show that he delivered the drugs because he was afraid for his family in that the person who provided him with the drugs was a member of a motorcycle gang and had coerced him into doing so. The defense tried to show that this person and the informant had also threatened his family. Defense counsel sought to establish that the informant was setting him up in order to get himself out of trouble. The trial judge rejected all defense efforts to introduce such evidence. As to this issue, the Massachusetts Appeals Court stated "Entrapment by law enforcement involves 'implanting criminal ideas in innocent minds and thereby bringing about offenses that otherwise would never have been perpetrated.'" To establish an entrapment defense the defendant must simply show an inducement by the government to commit the crime. The district attorney must then show beyond a reasonable doubt that either the defendant was predisposed to committing the crime or that there was no government inducement. The defendant is permitted to inquire about the relationship between the government and the informant. Podgurski was denied this right. Podgurski was also deprived of an opportunity to elicit testimony that the informant threatened his family should he not deliver the drugs. The Appeals Court found this too reversible error as it bore on Podgurski's state of mind. In essence, the defendant was denied his right to present a defense at trial.

Also at trial the prosecutor had the police weigh the drugs on a police scale in front of the jury. The drugs, Oxycodone, weight nearly sixty grams thereby satisfying the requirement for Trafficking Oxycodone over 28 Grams. The defendant objected to this strategy. The Massachusetts Appeals Court held that this was error. The district attorney failed to lay a proper foundation for the admissibility of such evidence. To do so, it must first show that the device is accurate. There must be a showing of proper calibration. This can be done by getting the device tested by a neutral, non-government agency or by using a known object with a know weight as a test for the device.

Read Opinion:

Commonwealth v. Podgurski, 10-P-2135.pdf

As a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer I am often perplexed at how some judges refuse to apply the law and deny a defendant the right to present a defense. This issue is not that difficult. Podgurski's lawyer did everything he was supposed to do to. He established that he had a good faith basis for his questions and his defense. The defense of entrapment is an affirmative defense that has its roots in common law. This defense is not new. It has been around for years. The defense contention that Podgurski is not a drug dealer is sound, reasonable and might likely succeed before a jury.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman defends the accused at all stages. We defend prior to a defendant being charged with a crime, at trial and for post-conviction purposes when necessary. Call us at 617-263-6800 or email us if you have a concern about a criminal matter.

Lawrence Massachusetts Man, 31, Avoids Jail as Part of Plea Deal for Charges of Larceny, Fraud and Conspiracy

2012-01-24T17:04:05Z

A thirty one year old Lawrence, Massachusetts man pleaded guilty for the second time in regard to charges of Conspiracy, Larceny and Fraud. The man initially pleaded guilty to twenty six counts of Auto Fraud. He subsequently moved to withdraw his guilty plea alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, a violation of his Sixth Amendment right. That motion was allowed in September of 2010. The defendant subsequently offered his cooperation to the prosecution in its efforts to prosecute auto fraud scandals in Lawrence involving staged car crashes. The defendant would refer the cases to local personal injury lawyers and chiropractors and collect a finder's fee. The victims and the accidents were non-existent. They were all part of a lucrative insurance fraud scheme. In return for his cooperation the defendant was permitted to plead guilty to eleven counts of insurance fraud related indictments. An additional twenty five charges will be dismissed if the defendant successfully completes a period of probation scheduled to last five years.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer

Insurance Fraud, Lawrence Criminal Lawyer, Essex County Criminal Lawyer Salem Superior Court Defense Attorney

This article shows just how important it is to have an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer at every stage of the proceedings. In this case the defendant initially pleaded guilty without being properly advised of the consequences his guilty plea would have on his status in this country. In March of 2010 the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Padilla v. Kentucky. There, it held that criminal defense attorneys must advise their clients who are not citizens of this country that their guilty pleas might have certain immigration consequences. Padilla holds that a lawyer's failure to properly advise his client of these consequences constitutes a deprivation of the right to effective assistance of counsel. Padilla holds that the Sixth Amendment requires affirmative, competent advice regarding immigration consequences. A lawyer's silence constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel even if the immigration warning was read to the defendant by the judge during his plea colloquy. Commentary to the Padilla decision suggest that defense attorneys should be familiar with the basic immigration consequences that flow from different types of guilty pleas, and should keep this in mind in investigating law and fact and advising the client.

The case involving the man in Lawrence shows that getting proper representation applies not just to the result itself but to all consequences stemming from the attorney's representation of the client. This is a perfect example of why it is critically necessary that when you investigate who to hire as your Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer you find out how long the person has been practicing, how many cases of a similar nature he or she has defended and the lawyer's overall experience. Make sure that you are comfortable with you decision. Do not hesitate to ask questions to make sure that the lawyer you are hiring focuses his or her practice on defending the accused.

]]> Our office has been in business for twenty four years. We are exclusively a Criminal Defense Law Firm. Call us now at 617-263-6800 or email us with any questions. Start your defense with us right now.

Nurse at Danvers Massachusetts Assisted Living Facility Charged With Larceny of Prescription Drugs

2012-01-22T15:49:46Z

A twenty-nine year old Marblehead, Massachusetts woman in facing charges of Larceny of Prescription Medication in the Salem District Court. The Salem News reported yesterday that the woman worked at Brightview, an assisted living complex in Danvers, Massachusetts. It is alleged that the defendant was swapping oxycodone and Vicodin with acetaminophen. A relative of one of the residents of the facility became suspicious and brought her concerns to the attention of the administrators of the home. An investigation resulted in the nurse being questioned. She confessed and was charged with six counts of Larceny and Possession of a Class B drug. The defendant apparently became addicted to pain medications after having orthopedic surgery.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Drug Crimes Lawyer, Danvers, Salem, Marblehead

There is a pretty interesting aspect to this case that is not often discussed or applied in Massachusetts Courts. The defendant's lawyer attempted to delay his client's arraignment in this case and put her in a drug treatment program. He wanted her to enter a five year sanctioned treatment program for which she already been qualified. This was a great effort on his part. Basically, get your client evaluated and treated. Then go to the district attorney's office and try to resolve matters prior to arraignment. If successful, the defendant's CORI remains entry free and future employment is not negatively impacted. The prosecution should be satisfied if it is determined by the evaluating and treating professionals that the defendant has addressed her problem and will likely not re-offend. Yet here, the district attorney opposed this effort and demanded the defendant be arraigned. The judge agreed with the prosecutor.

On its website, the Essex County District Attorney lists its own drug diversion program as an alternative to conventional prosecutions for people in this defendant's position. The link to the program is http://www.mass.gov/essexda/prevention-and-intervention/school-safety/essex-county-drug-diversion-program.html. The program sets out specific parameters. It is for non-violent drug offenders. It is mostly for people ages seventeen to twenty-six charged with drug or drug related crimes. The purpose of the program is to reduce drug abuse. The program is run through the various district courts in Essex County. The program provides "comprehensive substance abuse treatment services in lieu of being prosecuted through the traditional court process".

So why then would the prosecutors object to the defendant's request to continue the arraignment until the program was completed. The statute of limitations will not expire meaning that if the defendant fails to comply with the program's demands the district attorney can still prosecute her for these crimes. Her progress can be monitored by the probation department of the Salem District Court prior to arraignment thereby preventing the case from falling through the cracks. It seems to me then that the defense attorney's request was reasonable and consonant with the interests of justice. The position of the prosecution under these circumstances lacks substance. If their office policy endorses what the defense lawyer is seeking to impose then why voice an objection. Drug addiction is an illness that can be successfully treated. If this woman can benefit from such treatment then it seems reasonable that she be in the best position to go back to work. A clean CORI would make this much more likely than would having a drug entry.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman is dedicated to defending people accused of all crimes. Massachusetts Drug Crimes are defended by our staff on a daily basis. Call us now at 617-263-6800 or email us with concerns about your case. Your defense should start now.

Two Massachusetts Women, One From Lynn, the Other From Salisbury, Face Criminal Charges After Escape From Correctional Facility

2012-01-20T17:59:33Z

Allison Avagianos and Tricia Mendez were both in custody and serving sentences for criminal convictions in Essex County. Avagianos was serving her sentence for Larceny Over $250 and Reckless Operation of Motor Vehicle. Mendez, a Lynn, Massachusetts resident had been sentenced for Assault and Battery, Receiving Stolen Motor Vehicle and Attempting to Commit a Crime. Avagianos, from Salisbury, was due to be released in April of this year while Mendez was scheduled to be freed next week. Both were serving their sentence at the Essex County Sheriff's pre-release center in Salisbury. Three days ago, the women left the institution and walked to a local shopping center. There, they met up with a man who brought them to his apartment. Early Wednesday morning the women were arrested at the man's apartment. The man in whose apartment Mendez and Avagianos were found, Byron Isbell was arrested as well. He has been charged with Aiding and Abetting and Escape. The two women have been charged with Escape. The cases are pending in the Newburyport District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer, Salisbury, Lynn, Newburyport Crimes

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 2769 Section 16 covers the Crime of
Escape in Massachusetts. The law states that anyone who is incarcerated and escapes or attempts to escape from a penal institution in Massachusetts, or from any courthouse, or from the custody of an officer of a courthouse or penal institution can be punished by up to ten years in state prison. This law also applies to someone who is temporary released from custody but required to return and fails to do so. The crime is a felony. Anyone who harbors an escapee is guilty of being an accessory after the fact and can be sentence to up to seven years in state prison. Since all of these crimes are being prosecuted in the Newburyport District Court the maximum sentence for all defendants is two and one half years in the house of correction.

The crime of Escape from jail or prison is significantly on the decline. One report has this crime declining from 2,583 to 660 in a ten year period nationwide. Some suggest that that the reason for the decline is the construction of more modern facilities built with technology that makes the crime more difficult to commit. Another report states that prison escapes have decline from two percent to one percent over a ten year period. The vast majority of escapes are known as "walk aways", people serving sentences at community corrections facilities or minimum security jails. Mendez and Avagianos would fall into that category. People convicted of escape in Massachusetts usually serve their sentences in more secure facilities to prevent the repeated commission of the crime. There is also a tendency to sentence escapees to higher sentences as a punitive measure. It is critical that anyone charged with this crime consult with and hire an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer. These crimes can be defended successfully.

]]> Our office has defended escapes in the state courts in Massachusetts. There are many variations to this crime and affirmative defenses with proper representation can result in acquittals. If you have a criminal problem we can help. Call the Law Offices of Stephen Neyman at 617-263-6800. You can email us as well.

Lowell Massachusetts Firefighters Stumble on Marijuana Cultivation, Trafficking After Responding to a Call

2012-01-18T18:35:45Z

Two days ago at about 10:30 in the morning two women were walking past a home in Lowell, Massachusetts when they noticed smoke coming from a roof. Firefighters were called and quickly surmised that the fire was coming from a wood burning stove. While at the scene the firefighters smelled an odor of marijuana. Consequently they called the Lowell Police. A Search Warrant was obtained. During the execution of the search warrant the police found evidence of what they have called a large-scale marijuana. Specifically, the police observed and seized twenty-nine marijuana plants and forty four pounds of packaged marijuana. They also found grow lights, a water filtration system and three thousand five hundred dollars cash, all Drug Paraphernalia indicative of an intent to distribute. The owner of the home, Angel Luna was charged with Distribution of Marijuana, a Class D Substance, a School Zone Violation and Trafficking Marijuana. Bail was set at three thousand dollars cash. Luna's defense attorney argued that the total weight of the marijuana when accurately calculated will be less than fifty pounds which is under the weight necessary to sustain a Marijuana Trafficking Prosecution in Massachusetts. The case is currently being prosecuted in the Lowell District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Drug Crimes Lawyer

Trafficking Marijuana in Massachusetts is a felony in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 32E. The law states that anyone who trafficks in marijuana an amount of at least fifty pounds but less than one hundred pounds must serve at least one year in the house of correction. This is a minimum mandatory sentence. There is a maximum penalty of fifteen years in state prison.

One troubling aspect of this statute states that the substance trafficked does not have to be pure or have any degree of purity. Thus, the plants will be weighed individually and tallied with the packaged substance. The defense attorney's suggestion in this case is that a portion of this substance was for medicinal purposes and not for distribution. While the argument is perhaps legitimate Massachusetts does not have a medicinal marijuana law. Right now, only sixteen states have this type of law, those being Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. The District of Columbia has a similar law as well. Right now six states have medicinal marijuana laws pending before their legislature. Massachusetts is one of them. If the law passes and has a retroactive application then Luna might be able to avail himself of its provisions insofar as the plants are concerned. Of course, all of this assumes that the number of plants residents are permitted to grow falls within the facts of this case. But at least for now, if the total quantity of marijuana in this case exceeds fifty pounds Luna's defense will have to focus on his intent and show a jury that at least the plants were for his own personal use due to certain medical problems.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman defends people accused of committing crimes. We are based in Massachusetts however we defend people if courts throughout the country. If you are in trouble you need a lawyer. We can be reached at 617-263-6800. You can also email us with any questions. We want to defend you and the time to start is now.

Massachusetts Man, 40, Charged With Videotaping Person in a State of Nudity

2012-01-17T22:49:26Z

According to reports, a forty year old southeastern Massachusetts man has been charged with Video Recording or Surveilling a Person in the State of Partial Nudity. The defendant, Marco Silva is being accused of putting a hidden camera in the bathroom of his catering supply company and secretly watching women who worked for him going to the bathroom. He was arrested yesterday morning. Here is how Silva was caught. One of his employees noticed that anytime one of the female employees went to the bathroom the defendant would go into his office and close the door. When the woman was in Silva's office she saw the bathroom captured on a computer monitor. Police officers, armed with a Search Warrant located the monitor, a VCR and a camera hidden inside of the bathroom. The case is pending in the Fall River District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Sex Crimes Defense Attorney

Silva is being charged with a violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 272 Section 105. The law states that anyone who intentionally videotapes someone who is naked or partially naked and does so secretly when the other person is in a place where he or she enjoys a reasonable expectation of privacy, without that person's knowledge or consent is guilty of this crime. The crime itself is a misdemeanor punishable by up to two and one half years in the house of correction. There is also a fine of up to five thousand dollars than can be imposed.

We are seeing these charges in Massachusetts more frequently today than in the past. This is due to relatively inexpensive recording and transmitting devices that are common to most personal computers on the market today. The act itself typically begins as a prank. The defendants are usually college and high school students who think this is clever or funny. Trouble usually comes their way once one of their victims learns of the act. Prosecutions can be difficult to sustain in many of these cases since there is not actual recording of the act, rather, the defendant watches contemporaneously. Thus, without a witness there is no evidence for the police to find. Here is where the suspect usually makes a critical mistake. The police arrive with a Search Warrant as they did here. They find the camera and monitor. This corroborates the witness or victim's complaint. Then the officers talk to the suspect who admits having committed the crime. Had the defendant not confessed when questioned, then in many cases there would be no sustainable prosecution. This once takes me back to my regular admonition. Never talk to the police without first consulting with a lawyer. Nothing good can come from it. No one talks his or her way out of a criminal prosecution. An extremely large number of prosecutions and indeed convictions rely on the defendant's admission of guilt. It makes no sense to make the district attorney's case for him. Simply say nothing and hire a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer to defend you. If Silva did not speak to the police his chances of successfully defending his case improve significantly. If he did speak then suppressing the search and his statements become more important to his defense.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman defends cases like this one throughout Massachusetts. Our firm is exclusively a criminal defense law firm. If you have been arrested you should call a lawyer. We can be reached at 617-263-6800 or you can email us. We want to start your defense right now.

Four From Lowell Massachusetts Plead Not Guilty to Marijuana Trafficking Charges, Conspiracy

2012-01-12T23:44:49Z

Lowell, Massachusetts police were watching a Dublin Street address concerned about suspected activity. Then, this past Sunday, with the aid of drug sniffing dogs police were able to intercept a couple of United Parcel Services packages addressed to this location. It is estimated that the two packages contained at least seventy five pounds of marijuana. The drugs were located in heat sealed packages surrounded by coffee beans, a substance commonly used to mask the odor of the marijuana. Once the controlled substances were identified an undercover police officer, dressed as a United Parcel Services worker delivered the packages. They were received by Sanith Siv. Shortly thereafter, armed with a Search Warrant, Lowell Police officers arrived and searched the home where they found the drugs and Drug Trafficking Paraphernalia. Phaly Chhoeun opened the door. Also present were Mao Keo and Samnag Sath. All defendants have been charged with Trafficking Marijuana, a School Zone Violation and Conspiracy. Keo was charged with Possession of a Firearm in addition to the drug charges that all four are facing.

Read Article:

Lowell Massachusetts Drug Trafficking Defense Attorney

The defendants Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer in this case will likely mount a challenge to the search of the packages. The article is unclear as to whether the packages were opened prior to the undercover delivery or afterwards. Usually, once the drug sniffing dogs alert their handler to the package it is searched. If drugs are found it is then re-packaged and delivered in an undercover manner. That is probably what happened here. Two questions then have to be answered. First, should the reliability of the dogs' findings be challenged? Second, should the Search Warrant be challenged, particularly if the affiant is relying on the dog's work.

Not too long ago the Chicago Tribune reported findings only forty four percent of the time that dog sniffing dogs alerted their handler to drugs in cars did drugs or Drug Paraphernalia in fact exits. This can be attributed to the fact that dogs' noses are so sensitive that they can pick up residue from drugs no longer present at the scene where the dog makes its alert. The dogs might also be getting their cues from their handlers. When the driver of the car searched was of a particular race the accuracy dipped to twenty seven percent, thereby implicating a racial profiling issue. Getting the dog training records and alert history might be a beneficial discovery effort for the defendants in this case. Just how current the dog's certification is can be an issue that results in the suppression of the drugs and a dismissal of the case. Some courts have held that the use of a dog unjustifiably enlarges the scope of a routine traffic stop. As Supreme Court Justice Souter has said: "The evidence is clear that the dog that alerts hundreds of times will be wrong dozens of times."

]]> Our office takes calls from perspective clients at all hour of the day or night. If you call 617-263-6800 your call will be answered. Your emails will be read as well. If you have a criminal case you need to hire a lawyer right away. Call us to discuss your case. We are prepared to help you.

East Bridgewater Massachusetts Drug Investigation Results in Arrest of Three, Charged with Possession with Intent to Distribute, Conspiracy, School Zone Violation

2012-01-10T18:00:02Z

A Massachusetts drug and major crime task force had been involved in a one month long investigation of Heroin Sales in the greater Brockton and Taunton areas. The investigation resulted in the arrest of Leah Nelson, Abel Parker and Bryan Donachie, all Massachusetts residents residing in Plymouth County. An article in the Brockton Enterprise states that police watched Donachie travel from Wareham to East Bridgewater in Nelson's car. Implicit in the article is that Donachie was using the car and making the trips as part of a Heroin Distribution effort. The officers obtained a Search Warrant for the car. This past weekend detectives saw the three defendants in the car. They approached and found Nelson in the driver's seat, Donachie in the front and Parker in the back. As they approached the car the officers saw Parker packaging heroin. All occupants were searched. The police found about ten grams on Donachie. Each defendant was charged with Conspiracy, a School Zone Violation and Possession with the Intent to Distribute Heroin, a Class A substance. Nelson's car was searched as well. There, officers located Drug Distribution Paraphernalia, about one thousand dollars worth of heroin and some heroin ingestion materials. Authorities claim that Donachie was purchasing about ten grams of heroin per day, breaking it down and reselling for a substantial profit. The cases are being prosecuted in the Brockton District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Drug Crimes Attorney

The School Zone Violation is the biggest problem the defendants in this case, particularly since this case is being prosecuted in Plymouth County. The district attorney in that county does not like to break down school zone cases. The result is that the case will likely be litigated either through a Motion to Suppress, Motion to Dismiss or trial. The prohibition against selling drugs in school zones in Massachusetts is governed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 32J. The law states that anyone who sells drugs or possesses drugs with the intent to distribute the drugs within one thousand feet of a school zone or within one hundred feet of a playground shall be punished by a minimum mandatory two year jail sentence. The defendant's intent or knowledge relative to the school zone itself is of no relevance.

From the perspective of a Massachusetts Drug Crimes Lawyer, it appears that Donachie and perhaps Nelson and Parker have drug problems. The presence of the needles and syringes supports that at least one, if not all of the defendants were using Heroin. Using narcotics is consistent with Possession, not the intent to distribute. The district attorney will argue that the act of packaging suggests otherwise. The evidence as taken from this article suggests that a combination of the two are at work here. At times this factor can motivate prosecutors to consider a reduction of the charges to something less onerous and perhaps something that will not include jail time. Much of this depends on the record of the accused, the extent of his or her drug problem and the quantity of drugs involved. In cases like this one, the defendants need a good lawyer.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman is committed to defending anyone accused of committing a crime in Massachusetts. We are always available to talk. Call 617-263-6800 or email our attorneys now. We can help you defend your criminal charges.

Brockton Man Charged With Possession With Intent to Distribute Heroin, Assault and Battery on a Police Officer After Motor Vehicle Stop Becomes Violent

2012-01-06T14:54:21Z

Just a couple of days ago a Massachusetts State Trooper stopped a car that he witnessed run a stop sign. His intention was to issue a citation to the driver. When he approached the car the passenger made a furtive movement towards his legs. The officer asked him to get out of the car. The passenger, Jesus Silva-Santiago complied. Then, according to reports Silva-Santiago punched the cop in the face. A chase followed. The trooper caught up with the defendant and the fighting continued. The trooper was able to subdue Silva-Santiago with the help of some Brockton police officers who responded in support. Jesus-Santiago was transported to the police station for booking. There, officers located eighteen bags of heroin tucked in his buttocks cheeks. Jesus-Santiago was charged with Possession With the Intent to Distribute Class A, Heroin, a Second and Subsequent Offense, Assault and Battery on a Police Officer and Disorderly Conduct. The case is currently in the Brockton District Court however it will likely be indicted and prosecuted in the Plymouth County Superior Court.

Read Article:

Brockton Drug Crimes Defense Attorney

As a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer I really enjoy defending cases like this one. Like many Drug Crimes in Massachusetts, the strength of the district attorney's case lies in the legality of the police officer's actions. The stop of the motor vehicle will probably survive a challenge however the Exit Order may not. Exit Orders, ordering a driver or passenger out of a car, have become the source of considerable litigation in Massachusetts. The success of Silva-Santiago's defense will hinge on the validity of the trooper's actions in forcing the defendant to exit the car.

Federal Courts have embraced the rule that under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution police officers may order both the driver and passenger out of a car. There is not need to show facts warranting the officer to be reasonable apprehensive. However, as is often the case, the Massachusetts Courts and Constitution provide more protection. A 1999 Massachusetts set out the rule for exit orders as follows: "art. 14 requires that a police officer, in a routine traffic stop, must have a reasonable belief that the officer's safety, or the safety of others, is in danger before ordering a driver out of a motor vehicle." The test is whether or not a reasonably prudent person in the police officer's position would be justified in believing that his safety or the safety of others was in danger.

The officer contends that Silva-Santiago "reached down below his legs". This gave him concern for his safety. So here is the question in this case. Did he have a reasonable belief that his safety or the safety of others was in danger based on what he saw Silva-Santiago do? The analysis for this challenge is done on a case by case basis viewing the totality of the circumstances. I would be interested in seeing the police report for this incident to see what if anything, in addition to the defendant's movements led the officer to fear for his safety. A successful Motion to Suppress might result in a dismissal of all the Drug Charges.

]]> Our office has been challenging stops, searches and seizures and arrests for over twenty years. Our telephones are always answered. You can reach us at 617-263-6800 or by email. Start defending your case now. Our experience is unmatched.

Criminal Charges Filed in Lawrence Massachusetts for Larceny of a Motor Vehicle After Chase, Accident

2012-01-05T16:56:11Z

Angel Anaya of Fall River, Massachusetts and Jose Rivera of Lawrence, Massachusetts were arrested early Tuesday night following a brief encounter with the police. According to today's Lawrence Eagle Tribune, an auto theft strike force was working in Lawrence that day. They received a stolen car report for a Toyota. Shortly thereafter, a patrol officer spotted the car in a restaurant parking lot. This took place around 7:30 in the evening. The driver later identified as Anaya hit the officer and fled in the car. A chase ensued. Anaya hit another car as well as a police cruiser and along with his passenger, Rivera, they fled the scene on foot. Rivera was charged with Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle, Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle and Resisting Arrest. Anaya was charged with Assault With a Dangerous Weapon, Assault and Battery by Means of a Dangerous Weapon and Failing to Stop for a Police Officer. The cases are being prosecuted in the Lawrence District Court however these matters could be indicted and prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Crime Lawyer

Receiving Stolen Motor Vehicle in Massachusetts is a felony pursuant to M.G.L. c. 266 Section 28. The law states that anyone in possession of a stolen car, knowing the same to be stolen is guilty of that offense. The statute permits a sentence of up to fifteen years in state prison or two and one half years on the house of correction. A judge cannot continue a case like this without a finding. Anyone who gets convicted of a second or subsequent offense must serve a minimum mandatory one year jail sentence. Prosecutions for this crime cannot survive attack if it is determined that the district attorney did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had possession of the car, knew that the car was stolen and that he intended to deprive the owner of the car permanently.

In this regard, the district attorney in this case might have trouble proving this crime against Rivera. There is no indication that Rivera knew that the car was stolen. Things that might suggest otherwise are a popped ignition, simultaneous engagement in other illicit activity, particularly Theft Crimes, visible signs of ownership by another or the presence of other stolen motor vehicles. None of this appears present in this case. As a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer I have had many cases where the charge of Receiving Stolen Motor Vehicle has been dismissed due to an absence of evidence to attribute knowledge to my client. These cases are often difficult for the district attorney to prove, particularly as to passengers. Nor for that matter should evidence of Rivera's flight be compelling. Anaya's actions might well have surprised and scared him. Being present in a car responsible for striking a police officer, getting into a chase and an accident could understandably give people reason to flee. While that action was probably not the best course of action for Rivera it is not a determinant of guilt.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman is committed to defending the accused. We are in court every day fighting for our clients. There is no criminal case that we unable to defend. Call us at 617-263-6800 or contact us by email to discuss your case.

Woman Who Tried To Change Counterfeit Bills At Framingham Massachusetts Hotel Gets Busted In Room With Three Friends On Drug Charges

2011-12-29T16:30:58Z

Kaitlynn Niles of Lynn, Massachusetts and three friends rented a hotel room at the Red Roof Inn in Framingham, Massachusetts two days ago. At approximately eleven at night Niles went to the front desk and attempted to get change for a counterfeit fifty dollar bill. A wary employee recognized something to be wrong with the bill and called the police. The officers went to the room and noticed marijuana smoke coming from inside. They also saw money in plain view. Two of the occupants, Niles and Joshua Jefferson from Lowell gave false names to the officers. Jefferson was searched. In his possession police found four hundred fifty dollars cash and a scale. Jefferson admitted to making the money from Selling Marijuana. On of the other occupants in the room , Elias Breit admitted to buying from Jefferson. Officers conducted a Search of the room during which they located Drug Distribution Paraphernalia and more counterfeit cash. Jefferson has been charged with Distribution of Cocaine, a Second and Subsequent Offense, Distribution of Marijuana, Second and Subsequent Offense and Conspiracy. Niles was charged with Uttering a False Note.

Read Article:

Framingham Drug Case Defense Lawyer

Uttering a false note in Massachusetts is a felony. The proscription is set out in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 267 Section 5 which states "[w]hoever, with intent to injure or defraud, utters and publishes as true a false, forged or altered record, deed, instrument or other writing mentioned in the four preceding sections, knowing the same to be false, forged or altered, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than ten years or in jail for not more than two years." To prove this offense the district attorney must show four things beyond a reasonable doubt: 1) that the defendant either used or tried to use the note as being genuine, 2) that the note was counterfeit, 3) that the defendant knew it was counterfeit and 4) that the passing of the note was done with the intent to defraud. In this case the district attorney will want to introduce the additional counterfeit bills the police seized in the hotel room to show that Niles was not making a mistake when trying to change the fifty dollar bill, rather that she knew it was a fake and that she was trying to get real money in exchange for the fake. These cases are often continued without a finding particularly if the defendant does not have a criminal record and the amount passed is small.

As to Jefferson, he has some problems. I will repeat again my admonition that it is never a good idea to talk to the police without first engaging the services of a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer. If the statements the police attribute to Jefferson are true then he has admitted to committing the felony for which he is being charged. This was stupid and unnecessary. Breit too made a big mistake. The facts of this article suggest that if he had said nothing then the charges against him might not stand and be subject to a dismissal after a Motions Hearing. Let me say it again. You have no obligation to talk to the police. When you do you are likely to get yourself in more trouble. Contact a lawyer before speaking to anyone.

]]> The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman is committed to defending the accused. Call us now at 617-263-6800 or email us with a question. We are always available to meet with you and to start defending you.