Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Massachusetts criminal defendants may face more severe degrees of sentencing if jurors continue to struggle with reckless, knowing conduct. According to an article in Lawyers USA, a recent study Sorting Guilty Minds found that jurors had difficulty in distinguishing between "knowing conduct" and "reckless conduct." Participants were asked to evaluate hypothetical situations with varying levels of defendant culpability and harm to victims before deciding on a level of punishment. The subjects identified knowing conduct 50% of the time and reckless conduct only 40%.

If jurors continue to have this difficulty in understanding the distinctions, there could be very serious sentencing consequences for criminal defendants, especially in homicide cases. For example, in Massachusetts a "reckless" homicide sentence could range from a 2 to 6 year non-mandatory prison. A "knowing" homicide could yield a 16 to 48 year mandatory imprisonment. These sentencing ranging jumps would have an enormous legal significance for defendants according to the study in the New York University Law Review . The Model Penal Code typically requires that jurors infer the mental state of a criminal defendant at the time the crime was committed, since punishable guilt requires that bad thoughts accompany bad acts.

Massachusetts jurors must sort the defendants mental state into one of four specific categories- purposeful,knowing,reckless,or negligent. The category the jurors determine defines both the nature of the crime and degree of punishment. Therefore it is crucial that the jurors understand the distinction among the four. The Model Penal Code assumes that ordinary people can do this with a high degree of accuracy when properly instructed. However, this recent study of 1,326 participants yielded results that state otherwise. In many instances, the subjects reversed the MPC hierarchy and punished reckless behaviors more than they punished the knowing ones.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer Comments on Lawyers USA Article- Jurors Struggle With Distinguishing Reckless, Knowing Conduct" »

Attleboro's police chief is pushing for drug testing of his officers after news broke that drugs went missing from the department's evidence room, the Boston Herald reports, and he is asking for help on Beacon Hill.

No Attleboro drug arrests have been made yet, but the chief has been investigating, despite a "code of silence," from within the department. The chief thinks drug testing could have prevented cocaine and other narcotics from being stolen and also will ensure it doesn't happen again.

Our Attleboro criminal defense lawyers understand law enforcement officers are sometimes far from perfect. In this case, at least one officer is guilty of an Attleboro theft crime, and one involving drugs, no less.

It calls into question the ethics of the officers working in that department. The fact that some officers are potentially criminals and are being paid to investigate crimes is a big concern. Another issue concerns the credibility of the rest of the evidence in that locker room. How can defendants be sure that evidence intended to try to put them in jail or prison hasn't been tampered with by officers?

The flip side of that coin is that, once accused, officers are even less likely to get the benefit of the doubt and an aggressive defense will be required. A conviction of any charge will almost certainly result in job loss and could end their career.

Drug testing for officers must be implemented through collective bargaining with unions. So the police chief is calling on lawmakers to create bills that would mandate random drug testing for public safety officials.

Attleboro and its police union are currently negotiating how to implement random drug testing. The police chief says officers are asking for pay raises if they are to submit to random drug testing, which is difficult to do.

Experts believe that unsolved police drug theft cases can ruin public trust in a police department, which can prove difficult for officers to overcome. In 2003, $80,000 worth of marijuana was stolen from a police storage facility in Dracut. Two officers were accused of being "intentionally deceptive" and were suspended last year. In 2006, Boston police found that in hundreds of cases drug evidence was stolen. Yet no one was arrested.

Some suggest that drug testing isn't the issue, but rather theft in Attleboro at the police department should be the focus. While video surveillance and a better electronic coding system are positive steps in the right direction, the story shows that police can be just as culpable as the defendants they arrest.

If the drugs that were stolen were used, they are out of the users system by now. Drug testing won't show who stole those drugs. The bottom line is that officers are stealing from their own department and evidence is being compromised. The Herald article also doesn't state which evidence was stolen.

It will be interesting to see from what cases the drugs were stolen and what is happening to those cases.

Continue reading "Attleboro Police May Use Drug Testing to Snuff Out Bad Cops" »

Massachusetts child endangerment and drug charges were brought against an
Attleboro couple according to a reporter from The Sun Chronicle .
The couple was found asleep in their vehicle with their 16 month old son in the back seat. Authorities state the couple was allegedly waiting to meet a drug dealer. According to Attleboro police officials, Gaudreau III, and Bassett, were arrested in the parking lot outside the Dollar Tree Store on Pleasant Street, according to the Sun Chronicle report.

The couple was found with heroin and prescription drugs. Drug offenses in Massachusetts were made more difficult to prove by the United States Supreme Courts' decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts.

The police found two hypodermic needles on the floor of their vehicle and another was found in the pocket of Gaudreau's sweatpants. Paraphernalia with alleged heroin residue and brown liquid was also found. Bassett was in possession of 11 pills consisting of the prescription drugs of Suboxone and Diazapan.

To prove a drug possession charge in Massachusetts according, the Commonwealth must prove the following elements, that the defendant possessed an illegal drug, meaning that the defendant had the ability to exercise dominion and control over it and that it meets the legal definition under Massachusetts drug laws, which requires the Commonwealth to call a chemist or expert to testify as to the identity of a particular drug.

Gaudreau was ordered held in jail without bail for a probation violation hearing. When a defendant is on probation for criminal charges and commits a new offense, a judge can order a defendant held without bail pending the probation violation hearing. Given the seriousness of the new charges, it is not surprising that Gaudreau was held.

Bassett was ordered held in jail on $2,500 cash bail. The child was taken to Sturdy Memorial Hospital for an exam and placed in the custody of the State Department of Children and Families, according to the reporter. In addition to being charged with possession of heroin and unlawful possession of prescription pills, both also face child endangerment charges . The Attleboro couple is due back in court on February 7, 2012.

Continue reading "Attleboro Couple Charged With Drug Possession and Child Endangerment" »

A 23-year-old Framingham man faces major Massachusetts gun charges and drug charges after a SWAT team raided his apartment recently, The MetroWest Daily News reports.

Gun crimes in Framingham are often attached to other charges, such as drug crimes, as it were in this case. This allows prosecutors to seek more penalties against defendants.

It also gives them an advantage during plea negotiations. The more charges that a defendant faces, the higher the possible penalties, especially if charges can be sentenced consecutively. So, when prosecutors approach the defense about a plea offer, they often start with the highest possible sentence and work their way down.

While every Framingham criminal defense attorney is going to use their time to prepare for trial, the fact is that in most areas, 95 percent of cases end in a plea deal. As a defense attorney prepares to go to trial, though, he can discover evidence, contradictions in police statements and unreliable witnesses that can make plea negotiations more beneficial for the defense. So, despite the charges being stacked against the defendant, good defense work can sometimes lead to a good plea offer. Negotiating from a position of strength never hurt anyone.

In this case, 23-year-old Tyrone Fleurimont recently appeared in Framingham District Court on charges of trafficking drugs and possessing drugs within a school zone. His 21-year-old girlfriend, Kaleen Hardison, was also charged.

Police say they obtained a search warrant to search the couple's apartment and broke in looking for jewelry and a gun that they believed the man stole. During the search, officers also allegedly found heroin valued at $9,000 as well as $7,000 in cash.

The man allegedly has a warrant out of Dorchester charging him with gun charges and three prior drug charges, having a gun or ammunition without an FID card, carrying a loaded gun without a license, carrying a dangerous weapon and driving after a license suspension. Boston Police also have warrants out for the man on two counts of possession of a gun without an FID card, two counts of possession of a large capacity firearm, possession of a Class B substance with intent to distribute, trafficking in heroin, possession of heroin and possession of marijuana.

Fleurimont's Framingham criminal defense attorney brought up a great point -- that the search may have been flawed in the first place. The article makes no mention of the allegedly stolen jewelry and gun that the initial search warrant was for. If officers found nothing, yet knew that he had prior charges, they may have made a bad faith effort just to get into his apartment.

As for the man's girlfriend, her Framingham criminal defense attorney said there's no indication she knew there were drugs in the apartment, which is nearby a school.

The issue of search warrants is critical because in some cases, if police officers provided incorrect or inaccurate facts to a judge in order to get a warrant signed, the evidence that follows can be suppressed. If officers knew ahead of time that the defendant had a criminal history record and used that as motivation to try to get into his apartment, that could be a problem for the prosecution's case.

Continue reading "Framingham Man Faces Massachusetts Gun, Drug Trafficking Charges" »

A Weston man was recently arrested and charged after allegedly violating a Massachusetts restraining order his wife had gotten against him, The MetroWest Daily News is reporting.

Facing a restraining order in Westborough can be an embarrassing thing and typically derives from some type of Massachusetts domestic violence situation.

Westborough criminal defense lawyers recognize that these matters are private, yet can take a public turn once the issues get into the court system.

In this case, a 29-year-old man now faces criminal charges after he allegedly violated the restraining order and then forced a police cruiser off the road, The MetroWest Daily News reports.

According to the newspaper, the couple has had various domestic violence issues recently. The wife was arrested on Christmas Eve after she allegedly crashed a party at the man's Aspen Road home, threw a chair through a widow and assaulted someone. The wife, who previously had a restraining order against her husband, renewed it recently and the man showed up at her house and entered, police said, in violation of the order.

The wife told him to leave and as he did, he reportedly drove down the center of a road without his headlights, which caused a police officer to drive off the road. The man was arrested at his home and charged with a restraining order violation, driving to endanger, speeding, driving without headlights and failing to keep right.

Prosecutors have asked that the man's bail be revoked in a previous case where he is accused of assaulting his children. The man is being held on the probation violation, but no decision was made by a Framingham District Court judge on the prosecution request.

According to the Massachusetts Criminal Model Jury Instructions, in order to be convicted of violating an abuse prevention order (a 209A violation), the prosecution must show four things:

• That a court had issued an order that required the person not abuse, not contact, stay away from, stay away from a household or workplace of another


• That the order was in effect at the time of the alleged violation


• That the defendant knew the terms of the order


• That the defendant violated the order

These are very specific things the prosecution must prove beyond all reasonable doubt in order to ensure a person is convicted of this charge. And there are specific definitions in the law for what "abuse" and "contact" actually mean. Not every case is black and white and therefore an experienced Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer must be brought it to study the facts of the case and provide a sound defense.

These cases can tear apart families and friends as well as lead to significant criminal charges. They shouldn't be taken lightly, but rather should be defended aggressively.

Continue reading "Weston Man Charged With Massachusetts Restraining Order Violation" »

A judge of the Milford District Court lowered the bail in the case of Jose Saeteros accusing of stabbing a man with a broken beer bottle on Christmas Eve. Bail in all Massachusetts criminal cases is set at the arraignment date. The bail in this case was lowered from that set by the clerk magistrate. The report on Saeteros' case was made by Brian Benson of the Milford Daily News.

The issue of bail can be revisited at any point during the case. In order to have the bail amount readdressed, a Milford criminal lawyer must present evidence of a substantial change in circumstances to warrant the court changing the bail amount.

As a Massachusetts criminal attorney, often bail can be readdressed if the Commonwealth fails to provide discovery in a timely manner. Other issues such as delay in the prosecution of the case caused by the Commonwealth can be a basis to readdress bail, such as when a motion or trial is continued at the request of the Commonwealth. Additionally, bail can be changed when new evidence surfaces that cast doubt on the strength of the Commonwealth's case that was not available at the arraignment date.

In the case of Saeteros, the initial bail was set by a magistrate of the court. When an individual is brought to court, a judge is not bound by the bail amount set by the magistrate and makes an independent determination of what bail is fair to ensure the defendant appearance in court. In some cases, a defendant can ask the court to reconsider the bail set by the court, either by taking a bail appeal to superior court or asking the judge to readdress bail.

Four men faces Massachusetts drug charges of possession with the intent of distribute after police raided a hotel room at the Red Roof Inn, finding marijuana and counterfeit money. The four men charged were Joshua Jefferson, Elias Breit, Christopher Leavitt and Kaitlynn Niles. This is according to a report in the MetroWest Daily News.

Police were called after the individual tried to pay with a counterfeit 50.00 bill. A search of the apart revealed three ounces of marijuana, a digital scale and cash. The police found $ 1000.00 in counterfeit money.

The police also found 450.00 in the apartment. The four defendant charged appeared spoke to the police according to the news account the defendant Breit claimed he purchased the marijuana from Jefferson or 175. Jefferson told the police he got the money from selling the marijuana.

This was confirmed by defendant Brett who admitted that the money came from selling marijuana.

The case is very defensible for an experienced Framingham criminal lawyer. It appears that police did not have a search warrant to search the hotel. Additionally, a Massachusetts criminal lawyer would want to challenge whether the statements made were obtained after a knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of their rights under Miranda.

The statements will be critical in proving an intent to distribute as the amount found, 8 bags of cocaine and 8 bags of marijuana is not sufficiently large to raise a strong inference of an intent to distribute given there were four people in the room at the time.

Drug charges in Framingham, Massachusetts also carry the potential for a significant license suspension with the RMV. It is important to call a drug crimes lawyer in Massachusetts immediately.

As a Massachusetts criminal lawyer, reports have surfaced that probation departments are reporting to ICE, Immigration and Custom Enforcement, that a defendant is a noncitizen when conducting probation intake interviews. Anyone charged with a criminal case must report to probation so that probation can determine if the person appearing in court is the same as named in the criminal charge and determine eligibility for appointment of counsel.

A defendant's citizenship status is irrelevant to any criminal charges before the court and should not be asked by the probation department as it violates SJC Rule 3:10, §9. Additionally, a defendant should not answer any questions regarding immigration status. Since immigration status is irrelevant during a probation interview, and is also inappropriate for the court to ask during a plea hearing, Massachusetts criminal attorneys should instruct their clients not to respond to this line of questioning as it would violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

A Brockton couple was recently arrested in Whitman and now face charges of drug distribution from the back of their minivan, according to the Taunton Daily Gazette.

Charges of drug distribution or drug sales in Stoughton can be serious and can increase in severity based on many factors. Among them are the quantity of drugs allegedly sold, what type of drug, where the drugs are being sold and if there are other factors that may be used by police to enhance the penalties, such as if children are present, guns are used or the deal occurs in close proximity to a school.

Stoughton criminal lawyers understand that the government has been fighting the "War on Drugs" for decades and lawmakers are continuously updating and increasing drug crime penalties. A good portion of the number of people in our state prison system are there because of drug offenses. In some cases, treatment in lieu or jail is an option. In other cases, challenging evidence and preparing a case for trial offer the best options for a successful outcome.

There are defenses to these crimes, just like any other crime. In cases where an informant is used by law enforcement, there may be witness credibility issues that arise. If police don't properly obtain a warrant to search a home or vehicle, evidence may be subjected to a suppression motion. Rules must be followed and if overzealous police officers break them, that could benefit the defendant.

In this case, the newspaper reports, police received a tip that a man was selling oxycodone out of his vehicle after he was convicted last year of a similar offense. Police obtained a search warrant for the Dodge Caravan and stopped him after he pulled into a restaurant's parking lot.

Police allege that the driver, 43-year-old Kevin J. Connor, tried to run off, throwing a bag of oxycodone pills worth $400 onto the ground as he ran. Detectives found more pills, cash and two cell phones in the vehicle.

Last year, he received a suspended jail sentence for dealing oxycodone. Tina Foye, 42, a passenger in the minivan and who lives with Connor, was also arrested. The WEB Major Crimes and Drug Task Force -- with officers from Whitman, West Bridgewater, East Bridgewater and Bridgewater -- made the arrests.

The group has sought out oxycodone arrests, making it a focus of investigations the last 18 months, an officer said. Oxycodone is similar to morphine in its effect.

Connor recently pleaded guilty to a charge of possession with intent to distribute oxycodone after police raided his apartment and found 30 pills, plus marijuana and cash. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, but the sentence was suspended by a judge in Brockton District Court.

The news article doesn't make clear what charges the couple may face, though it implies Connor will face new charges of distribution of oxycodone. Charges for Foye, who was listed as a passenger in the minivan, are unclear.

For the passenger, who may have nothing to do with the drug sales, there may be a strong defense. For the driver, things may be different. But in a case such as this, the search warrant may be the most important factor. Finding out what officers based the affidavit for the search warrant on and how solid the information was will be key to fighting the initial stop and search.

Continue reading "Brockton Couple Accused of Making Drug Distribution out of Minivan" »

A teen from New York who attends Dean College in Franklin was recently arrested and charged with robbery and assault in Attleboro.

The juvenile pleaded not guilty to these serious college campus crimes in Wrentham District Court, the Boston Herald reports.

There are serious consequences if a young person is convicted. For a teen already in college, they could risk being suspended or completely kicked out of college. This can lead to a major hurdle in preparing for a future career or getting into another college or university.

In cases of robbery or other theft crimes in Massachusetts, police need to have substantial evidence to show the suspect stole from another. If they can't recover the stolen goods, that can be a big hit to their case.

In this case, 18-year-old Kirk Dudley of Staten Island faces up to 10 years in state prison if convicted of the charges. He was released on $2,000 cash bail and returned home, his Attleboro criminal defense attorney said.

The college has already expelled Dudley, who is accused of attacking a 19-year-old classmate. Dudley allegedly attacked the other teen, whom he thought had stolen a pair of sneakers. Eight other students are considered "suspects" by police in an ensuing fight. The college has expelled them, but the Herald isn't naming them.

The attack was caught on video tape, the newspaper reports. The sneakers were worth well over $200. The attack happened Dec. 2, but police didn't find out until nearly a week later, after a video allegedly showing the attack surfaced on the Internet.

According to the news article, the suspect verbally challenged the victim and then struck him several times with his fist. He then removed the expensive shoes from the alleged victim's feet and struck him with the shoes. Police believed the victim, who reportedly provided proof that he purchased the shoes in September.

The Massachusetts criminal lawyer says he plans to challenge the validity of that purchase and show that the shoes that were taken back from his client belonged to him.

As in any criminal case, there is much to be disputed. For one, the validity of the video will be key since police didn't find out about the alleged crime for a week. If the victim wanted to press charges, he should have reported the incident immediately. Determining whether the video was altered in any way could make a big difference in the case.

Prosecutors may also have problems showing that the property in question was stolen. Who owned the sneakers may be paramount to the case.

Continue reading "Dean College Student Pleads Not Guilty to Massachusetts Assault Charges in Sneaker Beating" »

Former Boston Bruins Coach and Hockey Analyst for NBC and Versus was charged with a Massachusetts assault and battery against an 12 year-old boy who was involved in a fight with his son during a hockey game. Milbury's criminal defense lawyer claims that Milbury broke up a fight between two players and did not strike, injure or threaten anyone. This was reported in the Boston Herald.

The Brookline police have secured video of the incident and have asked for any person in attendance who has video to turn the video over to the police department. It is very common for videos of alleged criminal activity to be recorded by someone present on a cell phone camera. Given the technology, these videos can be of very high quality and can result in a quick resolution of criminal charges. Clearly, the video tape evidence will be the key element in determining what occurred.

This week charges of Indecent Assault and Battery were dropped against Patriot's Receiver Julian Edelman after video tape of the incidence showed that the charges could not be proven in court.

Both the Milbury and Edelman case demonstrate that it is easy to have criminal charges in Massachusetts brought. Police can make an arrest and bring serious criminal charges based on the complaint of a victim even without having all of the evidence.

Based on the news account, it appears that Milbury would have a very defensible case at trial. if the case were to proceed to jury trial, it would be heard in the Dedham District Court as cases from Brookline are transferred to Dedham for trial.

A former Boston University hockey star and New York Islanders draft pick was recently charged with a sex crime in Boston.

This comes just weeks after our Boston criminal defense lawyer reported about New England Patriots wide receiver and special teams member Julian Edelman being charged with a sex crime in Boston as well.

Facing sex charges in Massachusetts can be a life-altering experience. It can lead, in the short term, to job loss, loss of reputation, time in jail, the cost of posting bail, family problems and other sanctions. In the long term, it can open up a person to prison time, probation, registration as a sex offender and other serious consequences and criminal penalties.

Corey Trivino, a 21-year-old native Canadian, was recently kicked off the Islanders after news surfaced of his arrest. He pleaded not guilty to two counts of breaking and entering in the nighttime and to a charge of assault with attempt to rape in Brighton District Court.

The hockey forward is charged with following a young woman to her room and forcing his way into the room, Fox News reports. According to police reports, when the girl told him to leave, he began kissing and groping her. He allegedly left and came back two more times. The last time, he demanded to spend the night and she called for help, forcing him to leave.

Boston University police later arrested him in the dorm's elevator and he said he lived with the girl. Police say he appeared intoxicated.

He was permanently removed from the hockey team's roster and was ordered to stay away from campus housing. The news article reports he surrendered his Canadian passport and is scheduled to appear back in court in January.

As with the Edelman case, this situation may come down to whether the "victim" is, in fact, a "victim." With athletes and celebrities, admirers may often involve themselves and then make unfair allegations.

In Trivino's case, he came to the woman's dorm room several times and she never felt threatened. Only after a third time of him coming over to her room did she call police. If there are no witnesses or roommates who heard shouting or some type of argument, it was probably safe to say she didn't really mind his company.

Not until the third time did she call for help and police made a determination that the alleged crimes had occurred. Obviously, hockey at BU is the biggest sport on campus, and their players are widely known. This can make for great fanfare for the student-athletes, but it can also lead to victimization because of their celebrity.

For the everyday person, a sex crime can be as devastating or worse. A job loss today is a major financial hit and without the means to get re-hired, it can be devastating. Not only that, but facing prison time and registry as a sex offender for a term of years can make anyone realize that fighting a sex crime is critical.

Continue reading "BU Hockey Star Charged With Sexual Assault in Boston" »

A Marlborough man is being held in connection with an alleged domestic violence incident involving his girlfriend, reports The MetroWest Daily News.

Charges of assault and battery in Westborough are typically filed by authorities in cases where there is some type of fight or domestic dispute. The severity of injuries sustained by the alleged victim goes a long way toward prosecutors determining what type of charge to bring.

This is a commonly filed charge in domestic assault and battery incidents in Massachusetts. And these charges, while somewhat common, can be some of the most difficult cases to bring for prosecutors. Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers have seen that many times, the charges come down to one person's word against another's, which can be tough for jurors to determine.

When police are called to a person's house after an alleged victim calls 911 to report a domestic incident, they have to make a snap judgement, based often on which person seems most credible, who is bigger and who has more scratches or bruises. This is a difficult task and many times, police take the stereotypical way out and choose the man as the suspect and the woman as victim.

Jason Cavooto, 36, is charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, assault and battery and threatening to commit a crime, the newspaper reports. He is already facing charges of running a methamphetamine lab out of his shed and carrying a gun without a license. The case is being heard in Middlesex Superior Court.

In this case, a Marlborough District Court judge ordered him held without bail after it was discovered he had the open case in Middlesex Superior Court. Bail was initially $10,000.

According to the newspaper's account Cavooto's girlfriend told police that they were sitting with a friend at their house when she said something to him. He cussed at her and punched her in the arms and stomach, which caused her to throw up, she said. He allegedly backhanded her, which knocked her out.

Later that night, according to police, he punched her in the mouth and split her lip. He is accused of throwing her into the kitchen table, cutting her back and breaking a mirror. He also allegedly grabbed her by the throat and choked her the next morning. When he called the next day, he allegedly threatened her and while the phone was still connected, told a friend he was going to kill her.

In Massachusetts, in order to find a person guilty of assault and battery, the state has to prove three specific elements:

• That the defendant touched the person without having the right to do so


• That the defendant intended to touch the person


• That the touching either was likely to cause bodily harm or was done without consent

Continue reading "Marlborough Man Charged With Massachusets Domestic Assault and Battery" »

Two women from New York have been charged in a case of trying to use counterfeit bills to make purchases at Target stores in Plainville, North Attleboro, Seekonk and Connecticut.

Counterfeiting schemes could be considered larceny in Attleboro -- a form of theft. In most cases, suspects use fake bills in order to make purchases. Many times, these cases can be difficult for police to discover unless the cashier checks the bills on the spot. However, counterfeiting can also be a federal crime investigated by the U.S. Secret Service.

Trying to piece together video footage and witness testimony after the fact and link a person to the crime can be a tricky proposition for the police. While the technology behind the government's printing of dollars has gotten better in recent years, there are still people willing to try to literally print money.

For those who are arrested, an experienced Massachusetts defense attorney must be hired in order to investigate all the facts and look at the evidence police intend to use against the defendant. It may be possible, in some cases, for the evidence filed by police to be suppressed if rights were violated in the process. That happens only depending on the specific circumstances of the case, however.

In this case, The Sun-Chronicle reports, two woman were allegedly conducting a scheme where they would use counterfeit money to buy electronics at stores and then attempt to exchange them at other stores for the cash.

"They were doing some type of flim-flam, buying I-pods and I-pads at Target, using counterfeit money to buy them, and returning them to other Targets to get real money," said Plainville Police Sgt. Scott Gallerani.

According to the newspaper's report, several thousand dollars in counterfeit money were confiscated by officers. 24-year-old Iyanah Wright of Hempstead, New York, and 22-year-old Shannon Hoskins of Freeport, New York, have been arrested.

The newspaper reports that Wright was arrested after a foot pursuit in the parking lot of a Target store in Plainville. Hoskins was found by store security and held there. Both women now face charges of possession of counterfeit notes, receiving stolen property and conspiracy. Wright also faces a charge of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

According to police, detectives in Seekonk and North Attleboro are now investigating to see whether the women may be connected to alleged incidents there. Connecticut authorities may be, too. The women reportedly have open cases in New York of a similar situation.

There may also be a man who is involved as a "lookout" in connection with the incident. The women were set for an arraignment in Wrentham District Court.

Proving that the women knew the money to be counterfeited may be a challenge for police. The fact that they may have committed the crime in different areas has no bearing on these individual cases. If they are charged with committing the crime in Connecticut, an Attleboro jury likely won't know that. They must determine guilt based on the incident that allegedly happened in that area. That may be tough in this case.

Continue reading "Women Accused of Counterfeiting Scheme in Plainville, Massachusetts" »

The United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Perry v. New Hampshire, on November 2, 2011, addressing the issue of whether the due process clause is violated when an identification is suggestive through no fault of the police, or with no State action. The filings of the Perry case can be found on the Scotus Blog. As a Massachusetts criminal attorney, the Perry case represents an important effort to ensure the reliability of identification testimony.

Under the due process clause, the United States Supreme Court has held in several cases, that the Constitution is violated by suggestive identifications. In United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967), the Court stressed that suggestive identifications provide a special problem for the criminal justice system. Modern day research and studies have demonstrated the problems with suggestive identification leading to wrongful convictions. The Innocence Project reports that suggestive identifications are the leading cause of wrongful convictions.

In the Perry case, the New Hampshire Court required the defendant to show that there was improper state action that led to the suggestive identification. In the Perry case, the identification testimony resulted when the victim came to the scene of the crime and saw the defendant speaking to another police officer. Unlike a case where the police conduct a line up or take a defendant to a victim and say is this the guy, in this case, the argument of the State was that there was no State action to create a suggestive identification to constitute a violation of due process.

The defense claimed that the witness could not identify the defendant from her window where she claims that she witnessed the crime, but only made the identification when she saw the defendant with the police officer, which the defense classified as an accidental show up.

At the oral argument, Justice Scalia pressed the defense counsel on the issue that unreliable identification testimony presents no greater problem than any other unreliable evidence and that if the court accepted the defendant's position would expand Constitutional challenges to all unreliable evidence. Scalia suggested that the Court did not mean that eyewitness evidence is unique as stated in prior decisions. You can click here to listen to the oral argument. From the oral argument, it did not appear as though there was strong support on the Court for the defendant's due process challenge to the identification.

Even if the United States Supreme Court rejects the due process challenge in Perry, as a Massachusetts criminal lawyer a defense attorney should still make a Perry type challenge under Article 12 of the Declaration of Rights.