Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

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" »

The Taunton Daily Gazette reports that two brothers are facing guns and drug charges after a police raid.

Drug charges and gun charges in Taunton often go hand-in-hand.

Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers have defended many clients charged with both crimes. In the Commonwealth, drug charges can range from possession of a small amount of marijuana to being caught with larger amounts that can lead to trafficking charges.

In gun cases, possession of a gun without a firearm identification card can lead to mandatory jail time. Possession by a convicted felon or using a weapon while committing another crime are also serious offenses.

But there are many defenses to these two charges. Your defense lawyer must carefully review the facts and circumstances that led police to believe they were justified in filing such charges. If they relied on a search warrant to gain entry to a home, car or business to seek evidence, what was written in an affidavit must be scrutinized.

In many cases, a group of people can be riding in a car that gets pulled over by law enforcement. If there's an illegal gun or drugs in the car, police will sometimes attempt to charge everyone. That's simply not right and cases like that have been overturned and charged dropped because police don't have the facts to back up such charges.

In this case, 19-year-old Adilson DaGraca-Teixeira and 21-year-old Jason DaGraca-Teixeira are charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute, conspiracy to violate drug laws, possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card and possession of a firearm without a firearms identification card. They are both being held without bond while they await a February 2 trial date.

On November 3, police raided their apartment at 56 Wales St. after they got a search warrant signed by a judge. Officers said they found heroine, oxycodone as well as a hidden compartment in the ceiling that contained ammunition and two handguns. The defendants' sister, Melinda Teixeira, 18, was arrested as well as three other people. She is being charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute, being present where heroin is kept and conspiracy to violate drug laws.

Three other 19-year-olds -- Alexander Torres Jr., of Brockton, Jeschalie Jimenez, of Providence and Darius Jones of Taunton face various drug possession charges.

These young people now face very serious drug charges that can have a profound effect on their future. But remember, it is the prosecution's job to prove the charges, not the other way around. A defendant doesn't have to say anything before a jury because the charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, not disproven.

There are defenses that must be considered for a person facing charges that are this serious. When the defendants are young and have a future ahead of them, the responsibility is even greater. Putting your faith in an experienced and aggressive Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer is the best course of action at the earliest possible stage in such cases.

Continue reading "Taunton Brothers Face Massachusetts Drugs Charges After Police Raid" »

The Sun Chronicle is reporting that four defendants charged with participating in a gas station dispute a few months ago may have their cases dropped because the videotape of the incident was accidentally taped over.

Gun charges in Attleboro can have serious long-term consequences, including probation, jail or prison time, fines and fees and a major blemish on a record.

Every defendant has a right to a fair trial and that includes being able to confront every witness and every piece of evidence the prosecution intends to use against you. By losing or destroying exculpatory evidence, the Commonwealth denies a defendant due process and the right to a fair trial under the Constitution.

It's not as rare as one might think. Attleboro criminal defense lawyers have witnessed many cases where police will misplace, misidentify or otherwise lose evidence in a case. Police handle thousands of cases and they have procedures to properly store evidence. But there are times when the system fails.

In this case, lawyers for the suspects are asking that an Attleboro District Court judge drop their cases. They argued that the videotape of the incident would clear the men of wrongdoing.

The manager at the Shell Gas station on South Avenue testified that the tape was accidentally recorded over. The police should have secured the videotape when they made their case against the suspects, which would have prevented the problem.

A police officer who viewed the tape wrote in a report that the tape didn't show any of the defendants with a gun. They were arrested later after their car was stopped and a .22-caliber handgun was seized from inside the vehicle.

Arrested were Joshua Demers, 19, of Attleboro, Manuel Teixeira Jr., 20, Dylan Contreras, 18 and Tyrone Ball Jr., 22, of Pawtucket. They have all pleaded innocent to a charge of carrying a firearm without a license, carrying a dangerous weapon and disturbing the peace.

The defendants are due back in court in December and the judge said he would make a decision on the matter before they are supposed to appear before him.

All suspects in a criminal case have certain rights. One of the most fundamental is the right to be able to inspect and view all evidence. If police and prosecutors botch the case, they should pay the consequences. In this case, it would mean having the charges dropped.

Continue reading "Attleboro Gun Case May Get Dropped Because of Poor Handling of Evidence" »

Police have accused two women of a conspiracy during which they faked a housebreak to steal guns and trade them for heroin, The Sun Chronicle reports.

Charges of theft in Attelboro as well as drug and gun offenses can add up to jail time, possible probation and fines and fees.

But whether a shoplifting or a serious theft crime such as a burglary or robbery, it can sometimes be difficult to prove for police. Without credible eye witnesses or some type of caught-in-the-act moment, police sometimes have a hard time fingering who committed a crime.

Even if they make an arrest, Massachusetts criminal attorneys will challenge the case put together by prosecutors and work toward the best outcome possible in a client's case. When evidence is scarce, there is plenty of reasonable doubt to show the accused isn't the criminal. And even if it appears there is an abundance of evidence, some can be thrown out with an experienced lawyer.

In this case, 38-year-old Shannon E. Wilson called authorities to tell them that her house on 87 Smith St. had been broken into. Police quickly turned against her and began considering that there was no break-in at all.

The Sun Chronicle reports that the woman then allegedly confessed that she made up the incident so that she and longtime friend Robert Delaney of Franklin could sell her husband's .22-caliber and .45-caliber pistols for heroin.

Both have been arrested, but there is a wrinkle in the case. Police haven't recovered the weapons. The suspects allegedly told police that the .22-caliber gun was sold to a drug dealer in Taunton and the .45-caliber gun was taken to Providence and sold to a drug dealer there.

Both defendants are allegedly blaming each other, with neither admitting to who committed the break-in or who took them from the storage locker and completed the drug deals.

Because both have pending cases in Wrentham District Court, a judge in Attleboro District Court held them without bond.

Wilson is charged with armed robbery and larceny in Wrentham, while Delaney has a prior drug case that is pending.

In this case, both face charges of larceny of a firearm, conspiracy, conspiracy to violate narcotics laws and unlawful possession of firearms with large capacity feeding devices. In addition, Wilson faces a charge of filing a false police report and Delaney is charged with breaking and entering.

Without an eyewitness to say who broke into the house, it may be difficult for the state to prove. And the fact that police don't have any evidence of where the weapons are or that they were actually traded for heroin casts doubt on some of the charges.

Delaney is charged with breaking and entering, but do the police really know he did that? If each defendant is blaming each other, it could be difficult for investigators and prosecutors to sort through what they have and ensure that they can prove beyond all reasonable doubt each of these charges. That's another reason why simply remaining silent is so often to a client's advantage.

Continue reading "Woman Allegedly Conspired to Trade Guns For Drugs in North Attleboro" »

According to a news report in the Attleboro Sun Chronicle by Stu Skerker, three Rhode Island residents and one Attleboro teenager were taken into custody and all charged with a Massachusetts gun crime of possession of a firearm without an FID card. This charge carries with it a mandatory minimum jail sentence of 18 months.

The news report states that police arrive at a gas station for a report of a disturbance and one suspect allegedly showed a handgun. As the vehicle was leaving the gas station, it was stopped by Attleboro police.

A search of the car resulted in the recovery of a .22 caliber handgun and .22 caliber ammunition. It is unclear from the news report where the handgun was found; all four individuals were charged with possession of a firearm.

As a Attleboro criminal attorney, the four individuals in this case appeared to have some viable defenses. First, a motion challenging the basis of the stop can be filed. It is unclear from the news report what information the police had prior to stop. The police officers in this case would have to show reasonable suspicion to justify the stop of the vehicle. The Attleboro Patch news account by Patricia Resende indicates that the four individuals were involved in an argument with other individuals on a limosine bus. The defendants could challenge the reliability and veracity of this tip.

Secondly, a defense lawyer in Massachusetts could file a motion to challenge whether the police complied with the Fourth Amendment in searching the car. Third, given that it appears that the firearm was not found on any one individual, the Commonwealth may have a difficult time proving who possessed the firearm. The Commonwealth would proceed on a joint venture theory, meaning that the Government would claim that all four individuals constructively possessed the firearm and had the ability to exercise dominion and control over. Crucial to the defense in this case will be, who is alleged to have possessed the firearm at the gas station and where were the four individuals positioned in the car when they were at the gas station, and where in the car was the firearm and ammunition found. The Commonwealth would likely ask for dangerousness hearing to seek to hold each of the four individuals without bail for up to 90 days.

While the dangerousness hearing in the case would potentially hold the defendants without bail, it would be a valuable opportunity to begin establishing the defense of lack of possession of the firearm and to establish the facts necessary to successfully pursue a motion to suppress.

Continue reading "Four individuals arrested in Attleboro on Massachusetts gun charges" »

The Massachusetts Appeal Courts addressed the issue of when police may make an investigatory stop based on 911 tips. The case of Commonwealth v. Alfredo Perez arose from an appeal of the defendant's conviction in the Brockton District court of possession of a firearm without an FID card in violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10. As a Brockton gun crime lawyer, charges of unlawful possession of a firearm often raise Constitutional defenses.

In the case, Brockton police received a report of guns shots fired. A police officer responded within minutes to the call. The police then received a second dispatch claiming to seeing a car leave the area where the shots were heard. The police were able to identify the vehicle and made a motor vehicle stop.

In assessing whether the police had reasonable suspicion for the stop, the Massachusetts Appeals Court applied the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), which addressed the issue of what type of evidence the police need to make an investigatory stop based on an anonymous tip. The Perez Court held that the Commonwealth had to establish both the indicia of reliability of the transmitted information and the particular description of the motor vehicle.

To establish particularity the Court held that the Commonwealth must show that the description provided sufficient detail to allow a police officer relying on the dispatch reasonably to suspect that the motor vehicle matched the description and was occupied by the person under investigation. To establish reliability the Commonwealth must show the basis of knowledge of the source of the information and the underlying circumstances demonstrating the source of the information was credible or the information reliable, which is known as the veracity test.

The Court found that the basis of knowledge test was satisfied with regard to both calls based on first hand observation. The Appeals Court next addressed the issue of whether the veracity component was satisfied. The Court noted greater reliability is assigned to those whose identity is known. The Court held that both calls were anonymous, with one callers identity never being known while the other caller's identity was only known after the motor vehicle stop. The Court stated that the fact that the officers went back to the scene to speak to the first caller supports a reasonable inference that they were able to do so because the caller either identified herself or could be traced by reasonable means.

The Court found that there was no additional evidence of police investigation to corroborate the veracity of the caller. However, the court noted that it could consider the imminent nature of the threat in assessing whether there was reasonable suspicion as well as the proximity between the call, the location of the incident and place of the stop. Accordingly, the Court found that the stop was permissible under Article 14 and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Continue reading "Brockton gun charge brought to the Massachusetts Appeals Court challenging lawfullness of the stop" »

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed the scope of the inventory search exception to the Fourth Amendment and Article 14 of the Massachusetts Constitution in the recent case of Commonwealth v. Eddington, decided March 10, 2011. The case is of interest to me as a Massachusetts criminal lawyer because of the concurring opinion of Justice Gants.

In the Eddington case, the defendant was charged with driving with a suspended license. He had a passenger in the vehicle who also did not own the vehicle as the owner was not present at the time of the arrest.

The officers did not contact the owner to have her pick up the vehicle, but decided to impound the vehicle and performed an inventory search. Following the search, a loaded revolver was found under the passenger's seat.

In determining whether the search was Constitution, the court held that impounding a vehicle for noninvestigatory purposes is generally justified if supported by public safety concerns or by a danger of theft or vandalism to a vehicle if left unattended. The court also noted other circumstances where impounding a vehicle is necessary such as when it is left on private property with the driver arrested or when the vehicle is stopped without valid registration plates. Further, the SJC stressed the three separate interests are protected by inventory searches: the protection of the vehicle and its contents, the protection of the police and tow company from false charges and the protection of the public from dangerous items that might be in the vehicle.

The Massachusetts criminal attorney in Eddington argued that under the SJC case of Commonwealth v. Brinson, 440 Mass. 609, 612 (2003), that the police should have left the vehicle were it was because it was lawfully parked and there was no evidence that the car presented a safety risk or was at risk of vandalism. The Court distinguished Brinson byt the fact that in that case the owner was present and selected the location where the vehicle would be parked. Further, the court held that the police were not required to contact the owner and acted reasonably in impounding the vehicle and conducting an inventory search.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Gants relied on several out of state cases to suggest that the police should be required to consider practical alternatives prior to impounding a vehicle. While agreeing with the opinion of the court, Justice Gant suggested he would take a narrower view of the inventory search exception and in the appropriate case may require the police to consider practical alternatives prior to impounding a vehicle.

Continue reading "Supreme Judicial Court addresses inventory searches in Massachusetts gun charge " »

A Superior Court trial in Dedham has ended after a jury convicted a 49-year-old man of seven Massachusetts firearms charges, according to the Patriot Ledger.

Elston Bone of Randolph was arrested in 2007 after a domestic dispute at his residence. Police say he slapped his wife and strangled her unconscious. Police say he was not at home when they arrived, but that his wife lead them to a cache of weapons in the bedroom.

A Dedham criminal lawyer should be called at the earliest stages of a case involving gun charges or domestic violence in Massachusetts. These charges can turn very serious and can have a lasting impact on your quality of life. A conviction can prevent you from owning firearms and may even prevent you from holding certain jobs, particularly those in law enforcement or the military.

Bone was found guilty of illegal possession of a firearm, two counts of improper storage of a firearm, illegal possession of a rifle, improper storage of a rifle, and two counts of illegal possession of a shotgun. He is scheduled to be sentenced Jan.12.

Continue reading "Massachusetts domestic assault case leads to gun charges in Dedham" »

A Worcester man faces charges of breaking and entering in Westborough and larceny of a firearm after authorities say be broke into the home of an acquaintance and stole a handgun, according to the Westborough News.

An experienced Westborough criminal defense lawyer should always handle cases involving the allegation of stolen weapons. Massachusetts Law (Chapter 266 Sec. 30), provides for up to 5 years in prison and a $25,000 fine for those convicted of theft of a firearm. Additionally, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and other legal complications often increase the penalties for crimes involving firearms.

Daniel Tenanes, 24, of 54 White Street, pleaded not guilty at arraignment in Westborough District Court and has been released on $1,000 bond. He also faces charges of larceny of property worth more than $250, reckless driving to endanger and failure to stop for a police officer.

Police say he broke into a Ruggles Street home through an unlocked door at about 11 p.m. on Friday. The resident came home to find the defendant's car idling in the driveway and reportedly discovered him upstairs in the house with the homeowner's Walther .38-caliber semiautomatic handgun, 58 rounds of ammunition and a gold necklace valued at $2,000.

Tenanes allegedly fled the scene. Police attempted to stop his car at shortly after 7 p.m. on Saturday but lost the car as it drove into Grafton during a brief pursuit. He was stopped and arrested by Grafton police a short time later. Police report he was in possession of the gun, ammunition and necklace that were reported stolen.

He is due back in court for a pretrial hearing on Jan. 21.

Continue reading "Worcester man faces larceny of firearm charge in Westborough" »

A Fall River man was arrested and charged with a Massachusetts gun crime after police claim he possessed a sawed-off shotgun. Scott Cambra was arrested along with Dana Mazyck when police claim that they found the gun behind Cambra's house according to a news account in the Fall River Herald News.

The police found the gun when executing a search warrant for the home. As a Massachusetts criminal lawyer, the Commonwealth would have to prove that the defendant constructively possessed the firearm as it was not found in the direct possession of either defendant. The defendant will claim that he did not possess the gun and did not know that it was in the yard. The Commonwealth appears to have a difficult case for constructive possession of the firearm. Typically in a constructive possession case, a firearm will be found in an area closely associated with the defendant such as in the defendant's bedroom or in the glove compartment of a car. In those cases, it is easier for the Commonwealth to prove that the defendant possessed the firearm as the firearm is in an area closely associated with the defendant's other possessions.

Here, there seems to be several avenues of defense for a gun crimes lawyer in Massachusetts. The news account suggests there is a dispute as to where the gun was found. Additionally, even if the gun was on the defendant's property, the Commonwealth would need other evidence that the defendant knew the gun was there and had the ability to exercise dominion and control over it. Finally, the criminal defense attorney would want to challenge the basis for the warrant allowing the police to search the residence under the United States Constitution.

Continue reading "Massachusetts gun crime brought against Fall River man" »

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in the case of Commonwealth v. Gomes, decided November 17, 2010, reversed a conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm. The SJC held that the motion judge was incorrect in denying the Motion to suppress filed by the Massachusetts Gun Crimes Lawyer.

In the Gomes case, the New Bedford police officer seized the defendant who was parked in his car based on an anonymous tip. The office ordered the defendant out of his car, searched him, solely based on an anonymous tip that a black male was holding a gun in the air and wearing a gray shirt and yellow pants standing outside a green Honda.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, applying the case of Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), which also addressed the issue of anonymous tips pertaining to possession of a firearm, found that the New Bedford police officer violated the defendant's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment and Article 14 of the Massachusetts Constitution and reversed the defendant's conviction.

The SJC found that the tip did not have any indication of reliability and that there was no indication of an imminent threat to public safety to justify the search and seizure of the defendant.

As a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer, the Gomes decision is an important decision from the State's highest court affirming that unreliable tips will not provide the basis for a seizure under the Constitution. Additionally, the logic of this case can be used in defending other Massachusetts criminal charges such as drug offenses or OUI charges. A Massachusetts OUI arrest may raise similar issues when a motorist is stopped based on a 911 call of erratic driving. 911 tips raise constitutional issues in OUI arrests as well as in Massachusetts gun charges.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Gun Charge conviction reversed by Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court " »

A Hudson auto shop owner faces drug- and weapon-related charges based on searches of his business and home, according to a recent report in the MetroWest Daily News. Richard Hatch, Jr., 38, of Sudbury, was arrested along with Carl Lagrassa, 40, of Marlborough, after a police search of Hatch's business, Advanced Automotive Experts. The search, for which police had a warrant, yielded a semiautomatic handgun and a rifle, for which Hatch did not have a permit. Police also found and confiscated 150-200 prescription pills for drugs such as Ambien, a sedative sleep aid, and two opiates used to treat opiate addiction, methadone and Suboxone. Officers also seized a cell phone, a computer, and about $175 in cash from the auto shop.

It was not clear why police originally searched the shop. However, after the shop's search, Sudbury police searched Hatch's home and Marlborough police searched Lagrassa's apartment. The search of Hatch's home yielded eight rifles, a black-powder rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, and more prescription pills. The search of Lagrassa's apartment also yielded more prescription pills, including the painkiller Suboxone (buprenorphine), and weapons, including a .44 caliber Smith & Wesson, other handguns, and a loaded 12-gauge shotgun. The weapons and ammunition were stored in a wooden gun case. According to court records, Lagrassa had a permit for large-capacity firearms, but police suspended it because he was selling prescription drugs. Police also observed a man enter and exit Lagrassa's apartment before the search; upon pulling over his car after he left, they found two bottles of Suboxone with Lagrassa's name on them in the car.

Hatch has been charged with possession of a Class B substance with the intent to distribute, possession of a Class C substance with the intent to distribute, possession of a Class E substance with the intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a firearm and improper storage of a firearm, all based on the search of his auto shop. Charges resulting from the search of Hatch's home have not been filed. Lagrassa was charged with possession of a Class C substance and improper storage of a firearm. Both Hatch and Lagrassa were arraigned in Marlborough District Court, were released on $500 and $300 cash bail respectively, and will return in April for pretrial hearings.

As a Marlborough, Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer with expertise in drug and weapon offenses, it is clear to me that anyone charged with such offenses should contact an experienced lawyer immediately. Possession of a firearm without a Firearm Identification Card carries a mandatory minimum jail sentence. Drug possession with intent to distribute is a felony and can result in substantial jail time, oppressive probationary conditions and loss of driving privileges. However, prosecutors may simply assume that there was intent to sell based on the amount of the drug found. A Westborough, Massachusetts drug crimes defense lawyer can help anyone faced with such charges by forcing prosecutors to prove that there was such an intent -- and intent is difficult to prove. An experienced attorney can also review the search warrant to determine whether it was obtained and executed properly.

Continue reading "Police Search Results in Weapon and Drug Charges for Sudbury and Marlborough Men" »

Massachusetts gun and drug charges have been dropped against a 30-year-old Worcester man after a judge tossed out evidence he ruled had been unlawfully obtained by police, the Worcester Telegram reported.

An experienced Worcester, Massachusetts defense lawyer should represent anyone facing Massachusetts weapons charges, drug charges or other serious criminal charges in Worester Superior Court. An experienced Worcester defense attorney can sometimes use search and seizures laws in Massachusetts drug cases to get evidence dismissed.

In this case, the defendant was indicted in 2008 on 30 firearm and drug charges after a police raid that authorities say netted heroine, cocaine and two caches of loaded weapons.

An Assistant District Attorney said the charges were dropped after the defense won two motions to suppress evidence, noting the remaining evidence was not sufficient to obtain a conviction.

The Worcester police vice squad and SWAT team conducted the raid after obtaining a search warrant. The defendant was not home and officers arrested him before an arrest warrant had been officially prepared and issued. The judge threw out evidence found during the arrest, including heroin and ammunition. The judge also ruled evidence found in one of five garage units was inadmissible because the warrant had not specified which garage unit was to be searched.

Continue reading "Massachusetts gun charges, drug charges, dropped as a result of faulty Worcester search warrant" »

Two teens and a young male defendant are facing Massachusetts drug charges and weapon's charges in Milford District Court.

Police arrested the trio in separate drug raids last week; one of the suspects reportedly fired a pellet gun at detectives as he tried to flee, the Milford Daily News reported.

The men, ages 17, 19, and 22, were all held on bail following arraignment. An electric stun gun and prescription painkillers were among the items seized by police.

The 19-year-old man allegedly offered crack cocaine to an undercover detective. When police identified themselves, he reportedly pulled a gun from his pants and started shooting at detectives while running away. The gun turned out to be a fake and shot only plastic bullets.

The defendant was charged with possession of cocaine, distribution of cocaine and assault with a dangerous weapon. he was arraigned in Milford District Court and held without bail pending a dangerousness hearing.

The other two defendants were arrested without incident in a separate bust, after police reported seeing a drug deal at Countryside Liquors on Central Street. Police confiscated Percocet, an electric stun gun and about $1,300 in cash.

The 17-year-old teen was charged with drug distribution and conspiracy to violate drug laws. He was ordered held on $5,000 cash bail following his arraignment.

The 22-year-old was charged with carrying a dangerous weapon, possession of an electronic weapon, possession of Percocet and conspiracy to violate drug law. Police say he also is wanted on two out-of-town warrants and was held on $2,500 cash bail following arraignment.

Continue reading "Massachusetts trio facing drug and gun charges in Milford District Court" »

A 64-year-old Framingham man is facing Massachusetts gun charges after a neighbor reported the man aimed a laser sight into his home, according to the MetroWest Daily News.

The defendant posted $10,000 bail and placed under house arrest after appearing in Framingham District Court. A Framingham defense lawyer experienced in handling Massachusetts weapons charges should represent anyone facing gun charges in the Boston area.

Police arrested the defendant at his Henderson Circle home, shortly after 2 a.m. Sunday after a neighbor called to report a red laser was being pointed into his house from the defendant's residence.

Police found a Black & Decker laser turned on and pointed out the window; they also reported finding a marinjuana pipe nearby, a prosecutor said.

Officers found several guns, including an assault rifle and a 9mm handgun, as well as a black powder handgun and a large-capacity magazine, according to the new's account. Prosecutors said the defendant did not have permits for the firearms.

The defendant was charged with disturbing the peace while armed, two counts of possession of a high-capacity firearm, unlawful possession of a high-capacity magazine, unlawful possession of a firearm, three counts of improper storage of a firearm and unlawful possession of ammunition.

The judge ordered the house arrest in response to the concerns of neighbors and reports that the defendant had acted in a threatening manner in the past. His attorney said his client has never been charged with a violent crime and did not point or threaten anyone with a gun.

Continue reading "House arrest ordered for man facing Massachusetts gun charges in Framingham District Court" »