Articles Posted in Theft Crimes

| by

According to the Salem News, last week a Beverly, Massachusetts man went into a Tedeschi convenience store wearing a mask and a hoodie. The store clerk was arranging items in the store. He heard someone come into the store. He then saw a man carrying a large semiautomatic weapon demanding money. He complied with the demand and gave the robber between one hundred fifty and two hundred dollars. When he realized exactly how much money he got the defendant expressed disappointment and fled. No arrest was made that day. By the way, the store clerk never saw the face of the man. A few days later the clerk believed that he saw the person who had committed the Armed Robbery just outside of the store. The reason he thought this was the culprit: the man was wearing the same pants and had the same gait. The police obtained an arrest warrant and on Saturday the defendant was arrested. The case is currently being prosecuted in the Salem District Court. Bail was set in the amount of ten thousand dollars.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer – – Mistaken Identification

Armed Robbery.jpg

A central issue to many criminal cases in Massachusetts is the identification of the accused as the person who committed the crime alleged. In Massachusetts it is the obligation of the district attorney to prove identification beyond a reasonable doubt. Mistaken identifications are not uncommon making your choice of a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer one of paramount importance. Since the arrival of DNA testing there are many people who have been freed from jails and had convictions reversed. Many of these convictions were based on eyewitness identifications that were made in error. I sometimes wonder whether some of these convictions could have been avoided with a better attack on the identification testimony.

Jurors in Massachusetts are instructed on the issue of identification if it becomes a live issue at the time of trial. Judges tell jurors that the witness must have had an adequate opportunity to observe the defendant. Jurors can consider a lapse of time from the time of the commission of the crime until the identification was made. Similarities between the person identified and other people who might have been near the crime scene or had the motive to commit the crime can also be a factor that impacts jury deliberations. An initial failure to make an identification is a factor to scrutinize when deciding guilt or innocence in a case such as this one.

The defendant referenced in this article has a lot work with in terms of presenting his defense. His lawyer did an excellent job arguing mistaken identification issues. I am surprised that the bail was set so high in this case given the suggested weakness of the identification. It would not surprise me to see the bail lowered in this case. I have had cases like this one and tried them to an acquittal. Mistaken identification cases require the services of an Experienced Massachusetts Lawyer.

Continue Reading

| by

According to a report in the Quincy Patriot Ledger Nicholas Chase of Rockland, Massachusetts went into a local Game Stop. Around noon last Friday Chase proceeded to convince the store employees that he intended to purchase a PlayStation3. He then asked the employee to get him something from another part of the store. When the employee complied with the request Chase took off with the video game machine. Oops! He forgot his phone. So what did he do? After a few hours passed Chase asked passers-by to go into the store to get his phone for him. Some of these people actually asked the store employees about the phone. The police were contacted. They eventually located Chase in his car in the parking lot. Oh, by the way, Chase’s phone had his pictures in it. He is being charged in the Hingham District Court with Larceny Over $250 and with several Motor Vehicle Crimes.

Read Article:

Hingham Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney

By any account it appears that Chase will have some problems defending this case. First, the store employees are witnesses and can likely make an identification. Second, Chase’s cell phone, left at the crime scene with his photos in it make his defense more difficult. Third, the identifications that can by made by the people in the parking lot will likely hurt his defense significantly. Lastly, his return to the scene of the crime where he was apprehended is tough to overcome. So what happens in a case like this? If Chase has no criminal record then his lawyer might have a shot at getting this case continued without a finding. Of course the Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Offenses might have to be packaged with the Larceny Over $250 case. If Chase has a criminal record then a continuance without a finding (CWOF) will be more difficult to obtain. There are likely many options available to Chase for disposition of this case.

If you ever want to read about stupid crimes go to the website www.clumsycrooks.com. What Chase is accused of doing pales in comparison to the things that people get caught doing every day. Just take a look at the first two articles posted on that website today: “Two men called police looking for help after two men stole their drugs and money late Saturday night, police said.” and “Police in Michigan said a 9-year-old girl who was pulled over while driving for her drunken dad told officers she had been ‘driving good.'”. This website puts out stupid criminal stories every day. The stories are true. At times they are mind boggling. At times the defendants are Massachusetts residents and/or people being prosecuted in the Massachusetts courts.

Continue Reading

| by

According to the Lynn Item, back in August of this year Michael DeStasio of Revere, Massachusetts entered a CVS pharmacy in Beverly, Massachusetts. He presented the pharmacist with a prescription for Percocet. The prescription was for an elderly woman. It was also a bad prescription. The police were called. They confronted DeStasio who claimed that he got the prescription from a man in a bar. DeStasio, who has two prior convictions for the same offense is being prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem. He is being charged with Uttering a False Prescription, a Second and Subsequent Offense.

Read Article:

Revere Massachusetts Drug Crimes Defense Lawyer

Uttering a False Prescription is a felony pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 33. The law prohibits anyone from uttering a false prescription and from possessing controlled substances through forgery or other deceptive means for the purpose of getting the drugs from someone permitted to dispense the substances, i.e. in this case a pharmacy. A conviction for this offense carries up to four years in state prison. A conviction for a second and subsequent offense, as is the case for DeStasio carries as sentence of up to twice that for first time offenders.

The law is pretty straightforward. As a matter of fact, it is so straightforward that there is virtually no significant case law discussing the subject in Massachusetts. There are some defenses to this crime discussed in limited detail in the Lexis annotations to the statute. There might be a defense of duress, or of coercion or perhaps necessity. The defense of necessity requires the district attorney to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the absence one of the following three elements: 1) that the defendant was confronted with an imminent danger, one that was clear and not subject to debate; 2) that the defendant had a reasonable expectation that his conduct would reduce or eliminate the danger and 3) that there was no legal effective alternative. This defense is rarely used. I recall using the defense of necessity successfully on one occasion. That case involved a defendant who was operating a motor vehicle on a driver’s license that had been suspended for OUI. One of his family members suddenly became severely ill requiring immediate medical attention. He called 911 and after waiting for over ten minutes he placed the family member in his car and sped off to the hospital. There was a record of his 911 call and the delay in the EMT response was well documented. The trial proceeded without a jury and the defendant was acquitted.

In the context of this case I have difficulty seeing the viability of the defense mentioned particularly where this is not DeStasio’s first offense. If he has a known substance abuse addiction or problem perhaps his Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer will have some success in getting this case resolved without the need of having to go through with a trial. Massachusetts judges and prosecutors are often sensitive to these types of problems and case dispositions tend to focus on rehabilitation and cure rather than lengthy periods of incarceration.

Continue Reading

| by

Last year a Marblehead, Massachusetts man was arrested following a bizarre incident involving the improper use of Facebook. Apparently the forty one year old man and the woman knew one another. She claims that they were just friends. On one occasion while alone with the man the woman fell asleep. She eventually told him that she did not want to spend time with him anymore. He then opened a Facebook page using her name and personal information. He also posted pictures he had taken of her during their relationship. A friend told the woman about the Facebook page and the pictures. The police were called. Their investigation led them to the man. The investigation also suggested to them that the woman had been digitally raped. Charges of Rape, Photographing a Person in the Nude Without Consent, Indecent Assault and Battery and Identity Fraud have been filed. The case was indicted and is now pending in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem. The article goes on to say that the defendant has a dating profile on “Plenty of Fish”. His profile boasts having sex in public and threesomes.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Rape Case Defense Attorney

As would be the case with most Massachusetts Criminal Attorneys this case intrigues me. Not because of the actual charges but due to the timing of the accusations. It is clear that nothing came about in a criminal context during the pendency of the “relationship”. Rather, once the Facebook page was posted the woman clearly became angered and felt victimized. Rightly so given that her pictures were posted on Facebook without her consent. Even according to the Salem News, the defendant’s lawyer concedes this point. And yes, the charge of Identity Fraud seems viable and perhaps indefensible. The other charges are not as easily provable. The defendant will probably defend this case on the theory that all acts were consensual, including the photographing of the woman naked. It will be difficult for the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these acts were not consensual. First off, when were these pictures taken? The woman is going to say that it all occurred when she fell asleep. What links that date to these photographs? How is the prosecution going to be able to show beyond a reasonable doubt an absence of consent. To the average juror it will appear that the relationship was somewhat significant. After all, how many people fall asleep in the presence of others with whom they feel anything less than comfortable? Here is something else to think about. Did the woman meet the defendant through the dating site? If she did she must have know of his sexual proclivities and found them intriguing at a minimum. How long had they been together and what was the nature of their relationship?

The Identity Fraud statute in Massachusetts is G.L. c. 266 Section 37E. The crime is a misdemeanor meaning in Massachusetts that no state prison sentence is authorized. This is minor compared to the remaining charges the defendant is facing. The Rape charge is a life felony and the Indecent Assault and Battery charge is punishable by up to five years in state prison.

Continue Reading

| by

carjacking2.jpgThe Brockton Enterprise reports that Brandon Cain and Alberto Velasquez both from Brockton, Massachusetts have been indicted for Carjacking and Armed Robbery While Masked. The charges follow an incident alleged to have occurred this past August. The victims reported that they were meeting with a friend whom they owed five hundred dollars. On August 23, 2011 at approximately 1:00 p.m. the two arrived at the meeting place. Two men then approached their car brandishing firearms. One of the men fired. The victims were ordered out of their car. The defendants fled making off with about one thousand two hundred dollars. One of the victims reported that Velasquez wore a mask over the lower half of his face. The police found the car abandoned and then found the defendants in the woods. In the vicinity of the defendants the police found a .22 caliber rifle and a black BB gun. Charges of ammunition possession and firearm possession were filed against Velasquez in addition to the Armed Robbery and Carjacking indictments. The case will be prosecuted in the Plymouth Superior Court.

Read Article:

Brockton Carjacking and Armed Robbery Lawyers

When evaluating potential defenses to a case Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyers often look at the facts and ask a simple question. What is wrong with the picture? In this case it is a little strange that the victims would be sitting in a car to pay a debt rather than simply going up to the door of the creditor and making their payment. Keep in mind it is reported that the creditor is a friend. Why then wait in the car? Next, this occurred in the daytime in a densely populated middle class residential neighborhood. There is no mention of witnesses seeing a masked man walking up to a parked car. There is no mention of any witnesses hearing a gunshot. There is no mention of anyone seeing someone carrying a .22 rifle as the report states. Don’t you think that someone would have seen this? Finally, why would the defendants be “hiding” in a wooded area near the location of the abandoned car? This makes absolutely no sense. Oftentimes in cases like this it turns out that the “victim” knows the defendant and the actual facts are nowhere near as egregious as initially reported. Sometimes these types of accusations arise from disputes over ownership of the vehicle, arguments over debts or drug deals gone bad. I would expect much more than was initially reported is behind these accusations.

Carjacking in Massachusetts is proscribed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 21A. The law states anyone who steals a car by putting someone in fear is guilty of carjacking. The attempt does not have to be successful to satisfy the elements of the crime. Both the Massachusetts Superior Courts and the Massachusetts District Courts have jurisdiction over this crime. Nevertheless, Carjacking in Massachusetts is a felony. There is an additional aspect of this law that is pertinent to this case. If the accused uses a rifle a conviction mandates a five year state prison sentence. The district courts do not have jurisdiction over this portion of the statute. The armed robbery statute has similar language. There is a five year mandatory minimum for the masked portion of the offense as well as the use of the firearm in connection with the commission of the crime.

Continue Reading

| by

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

| by

This past Sunday Tammy Ward was arrested when a security guard at a Salem department store saw her take a pocketbook out of a shopping cart. The victim is a sixty six year old woman from Peabody. Ward, was a familiar face to the security officer. He had seen her in the store in the past and believed that she was involved in some Shoplifting incidents. Once arrested Ward was charged with Larceny From a Person 65 or Older. The complaint issued in the Salem District Court. While it was being prepared, the Salem police prosecutor and the Danvers police prosecutor were involved in normal discourse about their cases. Hearing the facts of this case the Danvers prosecutor became interested in Ward, especially where a similar incident had taken place a few days earlier in Danvers. In that case a seventy year old woman had her pocketbook stolen from her shopping cart. The officer quickly compared a booking photo of Ward to a surveillance video photo. Concluding it was the same person another complaint was issued against Ward. Bail was set in the amount of two thousand dollars. Ward is also facing a Probation Violation Hearing as a result of these new cases.

Read Article:

http://www.salemnews.com/local/x962125874/Woman-accused-of-stealing-purses-from-2-shoppers

Ward.jpg

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 266 Section 25 states that anyone who steals (commits larceny) from a person who is sixty five years old or older is guilty of a felony. The punishment for a conviction of this offense can be as much as five years in state prison. Anyone convicted of second or subsequent offense of Larceny From the Person must serve at least two years in jail. This law is designed to protect the elderly and to deter predators from victimizing older people. In this case, the Peabody woman never knew that her pocketbook was missing and it is likely that without the observations of the security officer this crime would not be solved.

Each year about two million elderly people become crime victims. They are most often victimized by strangers, however caretakers and family at times play a role in their victimization. The elderly are more apt to get hurt than are younger persons. Many Massachusetts district attorneys offices have prosecutors dedicated to exclusively prosecuting crimes involving elderly victims. The sentences for convictions of these crimes is often harsh and is reflective of society’s intolerance for victimizing people less capable of defending themselves. This is why having an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney is critical if you are in the position that Ward now finds herself in.

Continue Reading

| by

Criminal jury trials in Massachusetts and for that matter everywhere are not always at exciting as the avid follower of lawyer televisions programs might believe. There can be times where a jury trial is just downright boring. Technical evidence such as DNA or medical testimony can send the average person into lala land. Jurors want to see evidence that is juicy and graphic. They want to hear horrifying or sexy eyewitness testimonies. Some trials however simply do not involve that type of fun stuff. Instead, prosecutors and defense attorney must focus on facts and details that can put jurors to sleep. In fact, that sometimes happens. That’s right. Jurors can fall asleep. So how do Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorneys and the Massachusetts Courts handle this issue? The answer to that came out today in Commonwealth v. Dyous, 10-P-603.

Commonwealth v. Dyous, 10-P-603, May 12, 2011

In Dyous, a Larceny case, the district attorney prosecuting the case alerted the trial judge to the fact that a juror had been sleeping “quite a bit”. The judge refused to make an inquiry and claimed that she did not observe the juror actually sleeping. The defendant was convicted and this became an issue on appeal. The Massachusetts Appeals Court clarified some long standing principles regarding the right to a trial by an impartial jury. It made clear that an impartial juror must also be attentive. Once this fact is brought to the trial judge’s attention it is the obligation of that judge to take action. The judge is to conduct a voir dire to see if the juror is capable of rendering a verdict based on the evidence. Obviously, if he or she slept through part of the trial this task would be impossible. In Dyous, the Massachusetts Appeals Court found that the absence of a voir dire left serious doubts as to the juror’s attentiveness thereby compromising the verdict and requiring a reversal of the conviction.

Continue Reading

| by

Jeffrey Lavin and Janet Baxendale, both of Tewksbury, Massachusetts have been charged with Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle. According to reports in the Lowell Sun, just at the end of last year a car was reported stolen from Crystal News. Later, police from Littleton, Massachusetts reported that that same car was used as a getaway car after a Shoplifting incident. That car was subsequently used to escape a similar Theft Crime in Haverhill and Lavin has been identified as a suspect in the theft case. Just last week, Tewksbury police learned that a car stolen in Chelmsford was parked at Lavin and Baxendale’s home. Police saw the car at that location and arrested the defendants. Right now all charges are pending in the Lowell District Court.

Read more:

Massachusetts Receiving Motor Vehicle Defense Lawyer

lavin.jpg

In order to convict someone of Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle the district attorney must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had control over the car, the it was stolen, that he knew or had reason to believe that it was stolen and that there was an intention to deprive the owner of the car. Massachusetts laws state that the person who actually stole the car cannot be legally responsible for the crime of Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle. This probably explains why both were charged with the same crime. It is unlikely that the prosecution can establish who stole the car so they are left with receiving as a sole mechanism for prosecution. Assuming however that Lavin stole the car then how is it that Baxendale is at all accountable for receiving. How is the district attorney going to show that she had control over the vehicle. As to her this might be a difficult case to prosecute.

Continue Reading

| by

This past Sunday Angel Ruiz of Lawrence, Massachusetts was arrested in the early morning hours. Authorities allege that Ruiz Raped and beat a woman with whom he had a relationship. Neighbors heard the woman screaming. Officers responding to the scene were informed that cut the woman and left the house. The woman was airlifted to a Boston hospital for treatment. The woman’s children were home at the time of the attack. Ruiz has been charged with Violation of a Restraining Order, Aggravated Rape, Assault and Battery, Larceny and Intimidation of a Witness. The case will be prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem. The victim was released from the hospital.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1388784548/Man-charged-in-violent-rape

Massachusetts Rape Defense Lawyers

ruiz.jpg

Ruiz is facing a big fight. These charges are severe. The Rape charge carries a maximum sentence of life pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 22(a). This is the more severe Rape Charge, commonly referred to as Aggravated Rape. The district attorney will have to prove not only non-consensual sex but also that the act resulted in serious bodily injury. That aspect of the law might appear satisfied by the fact that the victim was cut and that her injuries necessitated hospitalization. If the prosecutor cannot meet its burden as to the aggravated portion of the offense then there is a maximum twenty year sentence for a conviction of this crime. Either way, if this article is factually accurate Ruiz is facing a lengthy state prison sentence if his is convicted. As with any serious case in this jurisdiction, Ruiz needs to Hire an Experienced Massachusetts Rape Defense Lawyer.

Continue Reading