Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

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" »

Four men accused of a burglary, who first were suspected of an attempted abduction in Attelboro, are being held in jail on $25,000 bail, The Sun Chronicle reports.

Charges of burglary in Attleboro are punishable by up to 20 years in prison, which is likely why the defendants were held on such a high bail. This case also highlights the damage that can be done by the news media and makes the job more challenging for a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer.

The Sun Chronicle story, in its first paragraph mentions "attempting to abduct" and a 7 News report online repeats the same phrasing. Yet, there are no charges of abduction that these men face.

The damage has already been done in the court of public opinion. When people think of this case, they're going to think about the fact that police believe these men were attempting to abduct a woman, when there is absolutely no proof. Working to separate fact from fiction -- and fighting to keep irrelevant material out of court -- will be critical to the defense.

According to the news reports, a woman was jogging near the Attelboro/Rehoboth line, when she saw a van carrying several men drive by slowly. When the van turned around and drove by her again, she panicked, letting go of her dog's leash and running toward a nearby house. When no one was there, she hid in the woods.

Police have said she had the right to act that way. Maybe she did, but a van driving slowly, perhaps because the driver was lost, doesn't constitute allegations of an abduction. Other than the woman being spooked by the incident, there is nothing to suggest the people in the van wanted to harm her.

Sadly, this may be what sticks with people who have read the articles or watched the TV news broadcasts. After this happened, police launched a massive hunt for the men, using a reverse 911 message to alert residents.

Ryan McCoy, 23, of Attleboro; James Gould, 27, and Benjamin Gould, 23, of Plainville and Phillip Muggle, 29, of Rehoboth were arraigned recently in Taunton District Court after police arrested them.

The Sun Chronicle reports that police found property from a Smith Street house that linked them to a burglary. They also face a charge of witness intimidation, though it doesn't appear from the media reports that there is much evidence of that.

Because of all the excitement of a police manhunt and the media coverage, this will be a topic of conversation for a few days. Whether there is any real evidence linking them to a burglary remains to be seen. So far, they are guilty of nothing.

A burglary is fairly common, but an abduction isn't. An experienced Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer knows that jury selection is perhaps the most important part of a trial. If this case reaches that stage, it will be important to ensure jurors do not rely on media reports or evidence not before the court.

Without a fair jury, a defendant doesn't have a shot.

Continue reading "Accused Burglary Suspects Held on $25,000 Bail in Taunton District Court" »

The Baby Lisa case has garnered national headlines as local authorities and the FBI search for the child missing in Kansas City since Oct. 4.

According to The Kansas City Star, the 11-month-old girl was reported missing from her crib that day.

CNN reports that the FBI recently obtained a search warrant for the house and began searching recently and the order bans the family of the girl from returning home.

A missing child is a a nightmare for any parent. But if recent media reports have taught us anything, it's that authorities will look to the parents as soon as they look at outside suspects.

And after about two weeks, it appears that's exactly what's happened here. Obtaining a search warrant and banning the family from going into their home seems to indicate authorities are now turning their attention inward.

Charges of kidnapping in Massachusetts are among the most serious a person can face. Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers know the penalties are steep and will prepare a strong defense for a person accused of such a crime. That means challenging all evidence and seeking independent witnesses to verify the facts.

In Massachusetts, kidnapping charges can be penalized in a variety of ways, depending on the facts of the case. For instance, if the kidnapping was committed to extort money, a person convicted could be sent to prison for life. In other circumstances, the sentence could range from 2 to 10 years.

The Kansas City Star reports that police have revealed little about what they know to the public. The newspaper reports that the majority of the information coming out about the case has come from the child's parents.

The girl's mother has told the media that she failed a polygraph test, was drunk and may have "blacked out" the night the girl went missing and now the police are accusing her of being involved.

The parents and police differ about their cooperation level. The parents say they are helping, while the police have said they are not. It's been more than a week since the parents and police sat down and spoke and the parents aren't making the baby's older siblings, who were home the night of the disappearance, available to detectives.

The case started Oct. 4 around 4 a.m. when the girl's father got home from his overnight job and reported the girl missing. The mother said she had last seen the girl around 10:30 p.m. the night before.

A neighbor reported a man seen with a baby around 2 a.m. Within two days, the police had questioned the mother and said they were no longer cooperating. The family then scaled back interviews and appearances on national television.

CNN reports that a child resembling Baby Lisa was reported about 100 miles away, but that turned out to be a false lead. The family believes it's possible someone could have entered the home without the family knowing since their bedroom is on the opposite side of the house and the baby's room has a loud fan blowing.

But it appears police are spending more and more time focusing on the mother, since she was home the night it happened. She admits to being drunk, but denies involvement in her daughter's disappearance She has admitted she fears police will arrest her.

Continue reading "Baby Lisa Case Could Lead to Kidnapping, Murder Charges" »

Massachusetts threats charges were brought against Alex Finnigan, a former student at Bridgewater State University after his alleged to have threatened to shoot up the campus radio station because they would not play a requested song, according to CBS News. The defendant was charged with a felony charge of threat to commit a crime with serious public harm and the misdemeanor charge of threats to commit a crime.

To prove a charge of threats to commit, the misdemeanor charge, under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 275 Section 2, the Commonwealth must prove the following elements:

1. that the defendant expressed an intent to injure;


2. that the defendant intended teh threat to be conveyed


3. that the injury that was threatened, if carried out would constitute a crime; and


4. the defendant made the threat under circumstances which would reasonably have caused the victim to fear that the defendant had the intent and ability to carry out the threat.

To read more about the elements of a threat to commit a crime you can click on the Massachusetts Model Criminal Jury Instructions.

The contested issue in this case would be whether the defendant had the intent to carry out the threat; it appears that multiple calls were made but that the defendant wrote a letter of apology saying the whole thing was a joke. I would not expect the prosecutor to dismiss this charge, but to prosecutor and look for a conviction, given the seriousness of these incidences that occurred in the past. Further, as a criminal defense lawyer in Brockton, the defendant's letter of apology may making contesting the charge more difficult as it would possibly remove any issue of who made the threat from being challenged.

Continue reading "Massachusetts threats charge brought against man for threatening radio station host for not playing a song" »

After Massachusetts legislators passed the Criminal Offender Record Information registry reform last year, most companies can't ask a potential employee if they are a convicted felon.

That change has led to many ex-felons getting jobs throughout Boston. One Roxbury company, Roxbury Technology, strives to hire convicts because the company's CEO believes that if people have nothing to strive for, they will continue to commit crimes. If they have a steady job, they are dedicated, the CEO believes, according to ABC News.

While it is good news that some convicts are able to find jobs in this difficult economy, there may be many more who are unable to find steady employment. And given the power of the internet and ability to do online searches for blog posts and news media articles, some records stay in the public realm forever.

There may be circumstances in which a criminal history record may not impede on a person's ability to find work or move on with life, but that doesn't mean it's the rule. A defendant is always best off challenging a criminal charge, for the criminal penalties as well as the social ramifications. Fighting criminal charges in Massachusetts is critical and must be handled by an experienced Attleboro Defense Attorney.

In Massachusetts, the Criminal Offender Record Information reform is starting to take place. While employers now can't use a prospective employee's criminal history in a job interview, the second phase kicks in this May. In the second phase, convicts will have to wait less time before they seek to seal records for misdemeanor and felony convictions.

Here are some common facts about the CORI changes and a person's criminal history record:

• If there is an error with your criminal history record, such as charges appearing that you never faced, you must contact the probation department in the court where the charge originated.
• A person convicted of a felony previously had to wait 15 years before they were able to seal the record from public viewing. As of May, the time will change to 10 years. For misdemeanors, the time a person must wait dropped from 10 years to 5 years.
• Who gets to see a person's criminal history record depends, according to the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. The general public can get publicly accessible conviction information, such as records of people convicted and either serving or who have already served. Certain criminal justice agencies or others with clearance can also access these records.

Continue reading "Criminal Offender Record Information Reform makes it easier to seal records in Massachusetts" »

A Provincetown man is suing amid claims his privacy rights were violated after authorities allegedly kept records in connection with a voluntary DNA sample he submitted during an investigation into the killing of a fashion writer, the Boston Globe reports.

Massachusetts criminal defense attorneys are seeing an increasing number of criminal charges being brought in cold cases after hits from the DNA database link defendants to the crime. In addition to the state system, samples are submitted to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), which compiles and compares samples from defendants and unsolved crimes nationwide.

While seldom discussed as a reason to fight a conviction on felony charges in Massachusetts, keeping your DNA out of such databases can be critical to protecting your privacy rights.

In this case, Keith Amato sued after trying for two years to get his sample back from law enforcement. He claims the submission was voluntary and that authorities told him he would get the sample back if his DNA did not match a sample collected at the scene of the killing of Christa Worthington. While the sample was returned in October 2008, he claims the state crime lab has held his DNA profile, along with records and samples provided by other men.

Last week, the Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled his lawsuit can go forward; it had been tossed out by a lower court.

"The allegations that the defendants have retained Amato's highly sensitive DNA records without his consent and made them available for nonconsensual use in other criminal investigations are sufficient to constitute an unreasonable, substantial, and serious interference with Amato's privacy," the court ruled.

Worthington's trash collector, Christopher McCowen, was convicted in 2006 of her rape and murder and is serving life in prison. Worthington lived in Cape Cod at the time of the crime. Investigators solicited samples from numerous men who knew the victim. Amato was a relative by marriage of the father of Worthington's 2 1/2 year old daughter.

The lawsuit claims as many as 200 men gave samples and that Amato was assured any samples that did not match the crime scene would not become part of any state or federal database. McCowen also provided a sample before being arrested in 2005.

Amato was unsuccessful in retrieving his sample, despite requesting its return on numerous occasions from the Cape & Islands District Attorney's Office. The office said state lab protocol requires retaining evidence in murder cases for 50 years.

Such DNA dragnets are an example of law enforcement operating in a gray area. The "voluntary" collection of samples comes perilously close to unreasonable search and seizure and must be aggressively challenged by a Cape Cod criminal defense lawyer.

Unfortunately, such tactics have been around since the advent of DNA. The first use of DNA in a criminal case occurred in England after the rape and murder of two girls. "Mass screening" of male subjects was used to solve the crime. The case is recounted in "The Blooding: The True Story of the Narborough Village Murder," by Joseph Wambaugh.

Wambaugh is a former detective with the Los Angeles Police Department.

Continue reading "DNA Database Another Reason for Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney in Massachusetts" »

Defendants, at least in New Jersey, will be less likely to be convicted based on faulty eye-witness testimony, thanks to a sweeping new set of rules handed down by the New Jersey Supreme Court. The decision is New Jersey v. Henderson and can be found by clicking this link. The decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court is a landmark decision that hopefully will be followed by other state and federal courts. The success in this case of the defendant in this case was based on large part on the work of the Innocence Project in bringing the problems with eye witness identification to the attention of the Court.

Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers understand eyewitness testimony can sometimes be difficult to overcome at trial. Often believed by juries, it remains among the most unreliable forms of testimony the state can produce in securing a conviction. Trial defense in Massachusetts requires aggressively challenging the recollections and other evidence presented by witnesses to a crime.

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled a judge must hold a special hearing on the issues whenever the defense presents evidence that a witness may have been influenced by police or by other means. Other factors could include lighting, the passage of time between the crime and recollection, or whether the victim was under stress at the time of the identification.

Imagine a crime. Whether robbery, burglary or assault. The recollection of eyewitnesses is just one piece of a prosecution's case. Having a defense attorney in Massachusetts who understands the issues and knows what it takes to challenge the evidence can have a drastic impact on a defendant's case.

The court ruled when such disputed evidence is admitted, the judge must give detailed instructions to jurors on factors that could result in misidentification. While the new rules are only applicable in New Jersey, court watchers say the ruling could begin having an impact nationwide.

The New Jersey high court has long been at the forefront of criminal law. The 134-page unanimous decision was penned by the court's chief justice, Stuart J. Rabner. It called for a revision of the 34-year-old U.S. Supreme Court decision that outlined the test of reliability for eyewitnesses.

A special master assigned to study the issue estimated there have been more than 2,000 studies about the reliability of eyewitness testimony since the Supreme Court decision in 1977.

"Indeed, it is now widely known that eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions across the country," Rabner wrote."

Factors a judge should consider in establishing the credibility of an eyewitness include:

-Whether a weapon was visible during a crime.

-The amount of observation time.

-Distance between witness and suspect.

-Witness alcohol or drug use.

-Length of time between incident and identification.

-Whether the eyewitness and suspect are of different races.

Continue reading "Eyewitness Testimony Requires Aggressive Challenge of Massachusetts Criminal Attorney " »

A Swansea man once convicted of killing his girlfriend's 4-year-old son will get a new trial after his most recent retrial was interrupted by the alleged victim's father, The Herald News reports.

The situation happened recently at Fall River District Court, where Eric Durand of Swansea faces a charge of first-degree murder. He was convicted in 2006, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overturned the conviction on appeal. During jury selection recently, the boy's father disrupted the process, leading to his arrest. But the trial will go on.

Murder charges in Boston and throughout Massachusetts are the most serious a person can face in the Commonwealth. According to the laws of Massachusetts, Chapter 265, Section 1, murder is carried out with "deliberately premeditated malice aforethought, or with extreme atrocity or cruelty, or in the commission or attempted commission of a crime punishable with death or imprisonment for life."

While Massachusetts abolished the death penalty in 1984, murder is punishable by life in prison without parole.

Whether murder, or other serious felony charge, this case shows the importance of the appeals process and of the guarantee that every defendant has the right to a fair trial. That's why hiring an experienced Fall River Criminal Defense Attorney is essential. In the event a conviction occurs, an experienced defense lawyer will understand the importance of preserving various issues for appeal. In some cases, a defendant can't get a fair trial -- and the impartiality of the appeals court will be critical in seeking justice.

According to the news article, Durand was convicted of killing Brendon Camara by crushing his stomach to the point that his small intestine detached from his stomach and his pancreas split. Durand was allegedly babysitting the boy and his twin brother at the time.

After being convicted in 2006, the high court overturned it and granted him a new trial after ruling a doctor shouldn't have been allowed to be an expert witness because he hadn't performed an autopsy on the child. Expert witnesses are deemed so by a judge at trial after hearing proof of such qualifications presented by an attorney -- in this case the prosecution. The importance of having an expert witness is they are able to give opinions and tend to have more weight with jurors.

So, Durand is scheduled to go to trial a second time, despite interruption by the boy's father, who was recently arrested on a charge of criminal contempt for entering the courtroom during jury selection despite a judge ordering him to leave, the newspaper reports. He was being held on $2,000 bail and if he makes bail he won't be able to attend the trial. He will also have to wear a GPS tracking device and won't have to leave his Fall River home. Camara was part of a group protesting outside the courthouse, according to the report.

Cases involving allegations of child abuse are among the most high-profile and high-emotion cases that occur in our justice system. And because of the attention they get in the news media, an experienced lawyer must be hired in order to fend off the allegations in court as well as in the public eye. While the defendant is only tried in the courtroom, media attention can influence prospective jurors and the opinions of the general public.

Continue reading "Swansea Man Faces Retrial in 2003 Beating Death of 4-Year-Old" »

A 20-year-old Massachusetts man is claiming self defense in the wake of a Wareham assault that has led to a manslaughter charge, according to the Enterprise News.

A Wareham criminal defense attorney should always represent a defendant facing Massachusetts assault charges, especially when there is an allegation of a dangerous weapon, a serious injury, or a death. It is not against the law to defend yourself or to win a fight. Unfortunately, investigations by law enforcement can be one-sided and focused on gathering evidence of a defendant's guilt. It can be up to a defense attorney to conduct an independent investigation and build a case for self-defense.

In this case, Richard Walling was a resident at White Pines Motel, where he said he was defending himself from two men. The victims suffered a total of 12 stab wounds, according to a medical examiner's report read in Wareham District Court this week.

Police say the victims were wearing masks, kicked in the door and held the defendant's girlfriend to the wall in the moments before the attack. Walling's defense attorney said the men were attempting to steal his client's $2,000 inheritance.

Both men died and Walling has been charged with manslaughter as prosecutors contend he used excessive force. One of the victims was carrying what looked like a 9 mm handgun, but was later determined to be a pellet gun.

A man identified as Ryan Lachance is accused of driving what would have been the getaway car. He is charged with obstruction of justice and is in jail in Plymouth, according to the Enterprise News.

Continue reading "Self-defense claimed in Wareham, Massachusetts assault that led to manslaughter charge" »

The protection Massachusetts' statute of limitations affords defendants accused of past crimes took a hit last week when the state's high court ruled suspects identified via DNA evidence are not protected, the Boston Globe reported.

A Massachusetts criminal defense attorney should always be contacted when DNA evidence leads to an arrest. Typically, these will be serious crimes, such as rape or murder. Often, there is little or no remaining evidence other than the presence of DNA. In the weaker cases, law enforcement may approach a suspect for a statement prior to arrest. In other instances, a citizen's first inclination of an investigation could come at arrest. In either case, consulting an experienced attorney at the earliest opportunity is your best course of action. In neither case, should you cooperate with authorities -- a statement will be used against you by prosecutors and could conflict with a future defense strategy.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously concluded DNA can serve as the identity of the person indicted, even if a charging document lists John Doe. The ruling is similar to court decisions in five other states.

The case stems from a Massachusetts rape case in Suffolk County, where prosecutors have indicted 12 DNA profiles and were later able to put a name to some of the profiles and prosecute those individuals in cases where the statutes of limitations had no expired. The case the court decided was the first time authorities had put a name to a profile after the limitations had run out.

The defense lawyer in the case said the ruling means the court has essentially done away with statutes of limitation in cases involving DNA and that defendants could now face charges years or even decades later. Such cold cases are already inherently difficult because evidence is often lost or degraded, witnesses die or move away, memories fade and physical locations change.

The court said state lawmakers could provide added protection to defendants by changing the law, which has been done in several states. In those states prosecutors are provided with a limited amount of time to prosecute individuals once they have been linked to a DNA profile.

Continue reading "Court rules out statute of limitations in Massachusetts criminal cases involving DNA" »

The Boston Globe recently published an excellent report on the impact television forensic shows, such as CSI, have in the real-world courtroom.

In reality, a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer can frequently challenge the available evidence in many crimes -- it is the defendant's statements that are much more likely to be a problem. Television is Hollywood and real life isn't. The vast majority of cases do not have DNA evidence, which is expensive and time consuming. Other "forensics" seen on television might be available to the CIA (and we only say might), but is not going to be used by Massachusetts law enforcement anytime soon. For instance, detectives are not going to determine what type of motorcycle a defendant was using during a robbery by matching the sound of its exhaust caught on surveillance video -- which was an actual episode of a popular television forensics show.

In fact, the popularity of such shows can cause problems in a trial -- particularly when jurors think such evidence should be available if prosecutors or the defense just used a little more effort. A 2006 study of 1,000 Michigan jurors found that nearly half expected to see some form of scientific evidence in every criminal case. Nearly 75 percent expected to see it in murder trials. Of even greater concern, is that people trusted such evidence almost blindly; a study of 1,201 California jurors found scientific evidence such as DNA or fingerprints, was considered far more reliable than testimony from police officers, witnesses or the victims themselves.

So it goes without saying that it is critical to select a Massachusetts defense attorney who has the knowledge and experience to challenge all manner of forensic evidence while convincing a jury of its relative value.

Meanwhile, a new study of 400 murder cases found that the presence of forensic evidence had very little impact on whether an arrest was made, charges were filed, or a conviction was handed down in court. Just 13.5 percent of murder cases had physical evidence linking the murderer to the crime scene or the victim. If you are a defendant without an experienced and aggressive defense lawyer, that is a truly frightening statistic. In other words, the state wants you to believe that more than 85 percent of murder defendants are guilty because prosecutors say so.

According to the research, biological evidence was found 38 percent of the time, fingerprints 28 percent of the time, and DNA in just 4.5 percent of homicides. Research yet to be released shows that forensic evidence also plays a minimal role in other types of crimes, including robbery and burglary. Forensic evidence is collected in less than a third of such cases and is submitted to the lab just a small fraction of the time.

Meanwhile, the National Academy of Sciences is questioning whether certain methods used in forensics are even scientific and is decrying the lack of standards and certification. Problems are commonplace: In 2008, Detroit shut its crime lab after an audit found a 10 percent error in ballistics testing; New York State Police have come under fire for overlooking evidence that a crime lab was fabricating data; and a San Francisco crime lab was closed after it was revealed that an analyst was allegedly skimming illegal drugs for personnel use.

Massachusetts hasn't escaped problems. In 2007, the Executive Office of Public Safety found a backlog of more than 16,000 cases awaiting DNA testing. In fact, DNA backlog is a nationwide problem that has cost $330 million since 2004 and is one of the primary reasons an individual case is unlikely to be tested.

Continue reading "Forensic science plays role in few Massachusetts criminal cases" »

An informant testifying for prosecutors as part of a plea deal told the jury that one of the co-defendants threatened to kill him if he talked about the murder of a nurse and the brutal machete assault of her 11-year-old daughter, according to the Boston Globe.

Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers are frequently left to defend a client against the testimony of a jailhouse informant or a co-defendant who cut a deal with prosecutors. Such testimony is notoriously unreliable. We frequently discuss the need to remain silent and invoke your right to an attorney when arrested, regardless of how serious you think the trouble. This case is typical in that prosecutors cut a deal with some of the accused in order to win testimony against the others. Investigators will sometimes elude to such deals in soliciting testimony following arrest. Again, without the presence of your attorney no such deal can be guaranteed.

In this case, the 21-year-old testified for the prosecution that a 17-year-old friend threatened to kill him if he talked about the attack. The attack killed a 42-year-old woman and critically wounded her 11-year-old daughter, who was struck repeatedly in the face with a machete while playing dead. The informant testified in exchange for a deal that included lesser charges and a 12-year prison sentence.

Several of the defendants stayed at his house after the attack. Police charged four teenagers and young adults after word of the crime began to spread among acquaintances. Prosecutors also cut deals with two of those defendants.

Criminal Defense attorneys spent the day attacking the credibility of the witnesses, pointing out their testimony differed from the sworn statements they gave prosecutors.

Continue reading "Plea deals lead to witness testimony in Massachusetts criminal trial involving Machete attack" »

An excellent article in the USA Today illustrates how misconduct on the part of prosecutors threatens the freedom of countless defendants facing criminal charges across the nation.

In one case, an Orlando man was sentenced to prison in 2001 after jurors heard from countless witnesses -- nearly all of them prison inmates -- that he was a violent drug dealer. Instead, prosecutors concealed evidence that would have discredited many of the defendant's accusers. Nor did they reveal that a convict who claimed to have purchased hundreds of pounds of cocaine from the defendant, struggled to identify his picture. Others were offered deals to get out of jail early in exchange for their cooperation.

Inmate testimony is often worthless but that doesn't stop prosecutors from using it in an alarming number of cases. Massachusetts defense attorneys frequently remind clients not to speak to anyone about their case, including fellow inmates, and such testimony is a primary reason why.

USA Today documented 201 cases of prosecutors with the U.S. Justice Department violating laws or ethical rules since a 1997 law passed by Congress aimed at ending such abuses.

"Flagrant" and "outrageous" violations caught by judges have included withholding evidence, lying to judges and juries and breaking plea bargains. In each case reviewed by USA Today, the abuses were so serious that judges often threw out charges or overturned convictions. Hiring an experienced Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer can help ensure you have the best chance of being treated fairly by the system.

And of increasing concern is whether even prosecutors who are caught are facing adequate punishment. Despite some 50 investigations per year by the Justice Department, the USAToday found only 1 attorney who was barred even temporarily from the practice of law.

Such cases even affect the powerful. Former Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens was convicted in a trial where the justice department later admitted that prosecutors hid evidence.

Continue reading "Reports of misconduct by prosecutors underscore need to hire experienced Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer " »

A 22-year-old man is facing burglary charges in Attleboro after police say he walked into a house inhabited by a woman and her four children, the Sun Chronicle reported.

Hasaan Beazer, of Randolph, was ordered held without bail on Tuesday. He pleaded not guilty to unarmed burglary charges and also has a pending case that accused him of accosting a woman.

Under Massachusetts Law (Chapter 266 Section 15) unarmed burglary is punishable by 5 to 20 years in prison. The law requires that the incident occur at night and that their by an intent to commit a felony. An Attleboro criminal defense lawyer may argue lack of criminal intent to commit a felony in this case. Given the unusual circumstances of the news report, an Attleboro criminal defense lawyer may have a defense of lack of intent to commit a felony. This could result in the charge being reduced from a felony burglary charge to a lesser misdemeanor offense.

The suspect reportedly told the woman he was looking for someone before leaving the house. The woman's 19-year-old daughter told police he had followed her home earlier in the day. He was arrested about 10:30 p.m. when spotted by an officer walking in the area of Maple and George streets.

His attorney says he was talking to two teenagers before their mother came out and told him to leave. He is due back in court on Sept. 30.

Continue reading "Massachusetts burglary charge filed in Attleboro against man accused of entering woman's house" »

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to chip away at the Miranda warning, dialing back the landmark protections afforded criminal defendants since the 1960s, the Associated Press reported.

What is important for a defendant to remember is simply this: Never speak to authorities as the suspect in a criminal investigation without the physical presence of a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer. There is absolutely nothing to be gained form it. You are not going to talk your way out of charges. And, all too frequently, the statements you make are going to be some of the strongest evidence used against you in court.

If you keep that in mind, changes to Miranda won't impact your rights as the high court continues to water down what has become a defendant's most basic right over the last four decades.

"It's death by a thousand cuts," said Jeffrey Fisher, co-chair of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "For the past 20-25 years, as the court has turned more conservative on law and order issues, it has been whittling away at Miranda and doing everything it can to ease the admissibility of confessions that police wriggle out of suspects."

The original ruling was issued in 1966 and emerged from police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. Perhaps the court's most famous ruling, it requires suspects to be told that they have the right to remain silent, that they have the right to an attorney, and that an attorney will be provided if they cannot afford one.

A trio of decisions issued this year have pruned back some of those rights. The court approved a warning used in parts of Florida that did not notify defendants of their right to an attorney during police questioning. In a separate ruling, the court found that Miranda rights are good for a period of 14 days after a defendant is released from custody. Previously, an assertion of Miranda rights was good forever. Now police can attempt to re-question a suspect after a period of 14 days, even if they asserted their right to remain silent or to have an attorney present. This has increasingly become an issue in cold-case homicide investigations, where law enforcement felt they were hampered by a suspect who asserted his rights decades ago.

Lastly, the court has ruled that a suspect must overtly respond in asserting the "right to remain silent," just as they must tell police that they wish to have a lawyer present.

At least Justia Sonia Sotomayor found the irony.

"Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent -- which counter intuitively requires them to speak," she said. "At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so."

Continue reading "Miranda warning and right to remain silent without presence of a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer" »