Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

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" »

Six were brought to Attleboro District Court as a result of having an outstanding default warrant. The Attleboro Sun Chronicle reported that State and local police conducted a warrant sweeping looking to apprehend criminal defendants with outstanding default warrants. A default warrant is a warrant issued by the court when an individual fails to appear in court; when an individual is brought to court on a default warrant, generally the person is brought in custody and the Commonwealth will often make a request for a cash bail. The reason that a bail request is often made when a default warrant issues is because by failing to appear in court, a defendant allows the court to believe that only the risk of losing a cash bail will compel the defendant to appear in court.

The warrant sweep related to a variety of criminal charges including, larceny, shoplifting, driving an uninsured vehicle and assault and battery. Typically, when an individual has a no record or only a few contacts with the court, the court will release a defendant on a promise to reappear in court.

Continue reading "Six brought to Attleboro District Court on outstanding warrants" »

Closing two Plymouth County district courthouses will cost far more than it saves, the Enterprise News reported. The courthouses in Wareham and Hingham are among five that the state Trial Court may close in an attempt to erase a $21 million budget deficit.

Prosecutors, Brockton defense lawyers and other advocates say the closures would cost far more in police overtime and travel costs and would also bog down court operations.

The plan calls for the Wareham District Court operations to move to Plymouth District Court and Hingham District Court operations to move to Brockton District Court.

Stoughton District Court would stay open but the Norfolk Juvenile Court in Dedham would be moved to Stoughton. Several public hearings on the plans are scheduled for the coming days.

Stoughton Criminal Defense Attorney Michael DelSignore opposes any move to close the Stoughton court as it is vital that the court remain easily accessible to victims, defendants and witnesses who must attend court hearings.

Hearings are set for 5 p.m. Thursday at the Brockton District Courthouse, 215 Main St. Another hearing will be held Aug. 18 at Plymouth Trial Court.

Courthouse closures are likely to be a significant issue moving forward as the state looks for ways to save money. Communities left without a courthouse will be faced with the significant inconvenience and expense of traveling to a neighboring court. The South Shore police chief estimates that closure of the Hingham courthouse would cost an additional $67,000 in police overtime and other costs. The chief in Middleboro also expects significantly higher costs.

Lost jobs in closing courthouses and longer lines on both the civil and criminal side of courthouses that remain open would also result from any significant effort at consolidation.

Continue reading "Court consolidations in Plymouth, Brockton and Stoughton could impact court services" »

The Governor signed a measure into law on Friday that is aimed at making it easier for those accused or convicted of a crime to find employment, News 22 reported.

The Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) reform will ensure that a person's criminal record does not include crimes for which they are accused but never convicted. The distinction makes it more important than ever to seek out the quality representation of a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer.

Lawmakers who voted for the measure hope it will better allow defendants to put a matter behind them in cases where they are not convicted. "This is an opportunity for people who do not have an extensive or heinous crime on their record to get back in the workforce, be productive members of society," said Western Massachusetts Representative Brian Ashe.

Criminal convictions will also appear on your record for a shorter length of time: felony convictions will appear for 10 years from the date of release, down from 15 years; misdemeanor convictions will be sealed five years after your release, down from 10 years.

Murder and sex offense convictions remain in the system permanently.

And job applications will no longer be allowed to include a question about felony convictions during the initial, or first-level, screening process.

Continue reading "Expunging Massachusetts criminal records allowed by new Massachusetts law " »

In two cases decided on June 15, 2010, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court interpreted the resisting arrest statute of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268 Section 32B. The two cases were Commonwealth v. Quintos Q, involving a juvenile and Commonwealth v. Montoya.

In Montoya, police officers testified at trial that they saw the defendant fire three gunshots. The officers intended to take the defendant into custody, but the defendant fled on a bicycle. The defendant stopped and ran behind some stairs, was ordered to stop by the police, but continued to flee.

The defendant ran and jumped over a fence only to land in a canal. The officers did not follow the defendant over the fence but told him he was under arrest and the defendant made no further attempts to flee the police.

Under Massachusetts law, the Commonwealth must prove the following to obtain a conviction of resisting arrest. A person commits the crime of resisting arrest by knowingly preventing an officer from making an arrest or by using any other means that create a risk of substantial bodily injury to the police officer or another.

Monotoya's Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer argued that since the police officer did not follow the defendant over the fence, that the defendant cannot be convicted of resisting arrest because his actions did not create a risk of substantial bodily injury to the officer.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejected this argument holding that the officers did not have to be exposed to the risk as long as the defendant created the risk of bodily injury to the officers. The court held that the trial judge properly denied the defense lawyer's motions for required finding of not guilty as there was enough evidence for the defendant to be convicted of resisting arrest.

The second resisting arrest case, Quintos Q, involved a similar set of circumstances as Montoya. The defendant in Quintos Q, was a passenger in a car that was being followed by the police. The driver attempted to get away from the police, but crashed the car, at which time the defendant and the driver ran. The officer never had time to say anything to the defendant. Finally, another officer saw the defendant trying to climb a wall and yelled stop police. The defendant did not attempt to flee further as he was cornered.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court held that the defendant was not under arrest until he was cornered, trying to climb the wall. The court found that the officers never communicated to the defendant an intent to make an arrest. Accordingly, the SJC reversed the juvenile delinquency conviction.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court interprets the resisting arrest statute in two recent cases" »

Two area residents are facing Massachusetts shoplifting and larceny charges in Quincy District Court in connection with alleged thefts from South Shore Plaza stores, the Patriot Ledger reported.

A Massachusetts shoplifting lawyer should be called to represent anyone facing theft or shoplifting charges in Quincy or the surrounding area. A retail theft charge can have serious consequences and a record of shoplifting or theft can make it difficult to obtain employment or hold certain jobs and may even impact your ability to get a loan or rent an apartment.

The Patriot Ledger reported that a 30-year-Randolph resident faces larceny charges after being accused of taking $850 in merchandise from a South Shore Plaza retailer. He was charged with larceny over $250 after a store security guard at Macy's reported seeing him conceal 12 items of clothing and attempt to leave the store without paying.

In a separate incident, a Milton women who was arrested and charged with shoplifting, now faces an additional charge of malicious destruction of property after authorities accuse her of damaging a store security office.

The 21-year-old woman was arrested after allegedly stealing two pairs of earrings worth $130 from Lord & Taylor, according to police, who also contend she punched two large holes in the walls with her fists and elbows.

Both defendants face arraignment in Quincy District Court.

Continue reading "Pair facing Massachusetts shoplifting and larceny charges in connection with thefts from South Shore Plaza stores" »

Taunton, Massachusetts police are investigating a series of vandalism and tagging incidents over the past few days before the Christmas holiday according to a news report from the ABC news.

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 266 section 123A prohibits tagging or graffiti to property. The tagging statute carries with it the potential for a two year jail sentence in the house of correction; a conviction of tagging may result in jail time or probationary conditions. Further, a conviction of tagging typically involves an order of restitution for the damage to the property. Closely related to the tagging statute is Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 266 Section 127 relating to malicious destruction of property.

In defending a charge of tagging or malicious destruction of property, a Massachusetts criminal defense attorney would want to look carefully at the evidence identifying the defendant as the person causing the damage to the property. Assuming there is a witness to the destruction of the property, a criminal lawyer would attempt to negotiate with the Commonwealth for either a dismissal on restitution or a short probationary period.

Continue reading "Taunton, Massachusetts police investigate vandalism and tagging incidents" »

A New Bedford woman, Kristy Roshia is being held without bail in Hawaii after making threats to commit a crime against first lady Michelle Obama. Roshia is held in federal custody. According to a news account, Roshia made numerous threats against Mrs. Obama by calling the Boston Secret Service Office and telling receptionists that she would kill the First Lady. The Secret Service was able to locate Roshia as she mailed the office that she was in Hawaii. News accounts state that Roshia has been previously arrested for threats.

Under Massachusetts criminal law, a threat to commit a crime requires the Commonwealth to prove an expression of the intent to inflict a crime on another and an ability to do so in circumstances that would justify apprehension on the part of the recipient of the threat. Many Massachusetts threats charges involve cases of relatively minor threats of teenagers stating they want to fight someone. In some cases, a threat will be made as a result of being in a heated argument or relationship. Often charges of threats to commit a crime can be resolved favorably at a pretrial proceeding and do not require the necessity of a trial.

Continue reading "New Bedford, Massachusetts woman held on threats charge against First Lady, Michelle Obama" »