Attorney Topazio respects the privacy rights of his clients and as a result has omitted his clients' names from the following case descriptions. Additionally, docket numbers and dates of offenses may have been omitted at a client's request, as well as entire case summaries due to privacy concerns. This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. If you need additional information, call or e-mail Attorney Topazio directly regarding your specific concern.
February 11, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
0901 CR 6943
Possession with intent to distribute Class B, M.G.L. c. 94C, § 32A
The defendant, who was represented by Attorney Topazio, was summonsed to court for possession with intent to distribute a class B substance, when crack cocaine was found in his motor vehicle which was being operated by a second individual who was involved in a drug sale with an undercover officer. The second individual, who was the operator of the defendant's motor vehicle, was arrested at the scene. When an additional amount of drugs were found in the motor vehicle, the defendant was summonsed to court for the crime charged because he was the registered owner of the motor vehicle. At the defendant's arraignment, Attorney Topazio objected to his client being arraigned alleging that there was no probable cause to charge the defendant on the facts alleged, arguing that the defendant could not be in constructive possession of the drugs found, and the court agreed and requested the District Attorney to further investigate this matter and the case was continued prior to arraignment. After several court appearances, the District Attorney, after fingerprinting the drugs found in the defendant's motor vehicle, moved to dismiss the charge against the defendant prior to arraignment, thus preserving the defendant's criminal record as this criminal entry would not appear on his CORI until the defendant was arraigned.
Result: Case dismissed prior to arraignment and criminal record preserved.
February 9, 2010
Brookline District Court
8709CR0560
Larceny of Property over $100 M.G.L. c. 266 § 30
The defendant, a resident of California, and former resident of Massachusetts, recently ran into trouble with the California Registry of Motor Vehicles when the California RMV refused to renew his California driver's license due to a court default in Massachusetts. When the defendant was told that he had to appear in court in person in Massachusetts to remove the default, he hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio filed a motion in the District Court asking the court to waive his client's appearance due to financial hardship. Attorney Topazio investigated the matter and convinced the District Attorney that the case was not viable. As a result, Attorney Topazio entered into a plea agreement with the Commonwealth whereby it was agreed that the case would be dismissed upon court costs, in lieu of having the defendant return to Massachusetts from California. Attorney Topazio was able to recall the default warrant in the defendant's absence, enabling the client to renew his California driver's license.
Result: Case dismissed and warrant withdrawn in defendant's absence.
January 27, 2010
Chelsea District Court
0914 CR 1087
OUI liquor or .08% M.G.L. c. 90, § 24(1)(a)(1)
Possession of open Container of alcohol in MV M.G.L. c. 90, § 24I
The defendant, who was represented by Attorney Topazio, was arrested for operating under the influence of alcohol (also known as OUI or DWI) when he was found unconscious in his motor vehicle, with an open bottle of vodka, the keys in the ignition and with the radio on. The client informed Attorney Topazio that despite being intoxicated, he never drove while impaired but rather, after being unable to find employment, damaged the steering column of his motor vehicle when parking it, and when he was unable to remove the key from the ignition, walked to a local liquor store, bought a bottle of vodka and drank it in his disabled motor vehicle and became intoxicated instead of walking home unemployed to face his wife and kids. Attorney Topazio hired a private investigator to corroborate his client's story and to prepare the case for trial. Under Massachusetts law, "Operation" is not limited to driving a vehicle or setting it in motion, but encompasses also the intentional act of starting the vehicle's engine; that is does any act or makes use of any mechanical or electrical agency which alone or in sequence will set in motion the motive power of the vehicle. Attorney Topazio argued at trial that an intoxicated driver asleep in a motor vehicle with the key in the ignition may warrant an inference of operation, but argued that the inference is rebuttable. Attorney Topazio proved that although his client was intoxicated when found by the police after conducting a well-being check, he did not drive while impaired but rather got drunk in his car. After trial the defendant was found not guilty.
Result: After trial the Defendant found not guilty of operating under the influence.
January 19, 2010
Ayer District Court
Docket intentionally omitted
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, § 100C; M.G.L. c. 94C, § 44
The defendant a graduate of Bryant College hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of five counts, three motor vehicle violations, Possession of class D substance, and minor in possession of alcohol. The defendant who found employment overseas as a teacher of English as a second language needed to obtain a teaching certification which as a prerequisite required applicants to have a clean record. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite being arrested, charged and placed on probation for these crimes.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
January 15, 2010
Newburyport District Court
0922CR0164
Operating with a Suspended License MGL c. 90 § 23
Possession of Heroin, Class A MGL c. 94C c. 34
The defendant was arrested when a Registry of Motor Vehicle check of his registration conducted by the police indicated that his license was suspended. A search of his motor vehicle revealed a bottle cap with residue that the arresting officer suspected to be heroin residue. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio pushed his client's case to trial and relying on the recent case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009), Attorney Topazio on August 31, 2009 was effective in getting the case against his client dismissed at trial because the Commonwealth could not prove the residue found in the bottle cap in the defendant's motor vehicle was a controlled substance without the testimony of a chemist. Prior to Melendez-Diaz, it was standard practice in drug cases for the Commonwealth to rely only upon a certified copy of a drug certificate to prove that a substance was a controlled substance. Melendez-Diaz is a Supreme Court decision which now requires that a chemist must testify in cases where a drug certificate is to be introduced at trial. In the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts ruling on June 25, 2009, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for a 5-4 majority, held that the introduction of a drug certificate without the testimony of a chemist violated the defendant's confrontation rights under the Sixth Amendment. Despite the dismissal, the Commonwealth brought new charges against his client, reactivating the dismissed case and seeking incarceration upon a conviction. Today, in lieu of trying the case for fear of a conviction should the Commonwealth have a Chemist testify and certain incarceration, Attorney Topazio persuaded the court to give his client probation with level III OCC upon a change of plea, and the court agreed. Community Corrections Centers are community based, intensive supervision sites, which deliver bundled sanctions and services, including treatment and education, to high risk offenders via Intermediate Sanction Levels. Intermediate Sanction Level III is an intense level of community-based, criminal justice supervision. Sanctions and services required at this level of supervision represent a daily imposition upon the liberty of the offender. Level III participants are required to report to the community corrections center for one to four hours per day, three to five days per week. Offenders placed at Intermediate Sanction Level III may be monitored via electronic device. Level III also requires random drug and alcohol testing, and attendance at one four hour community service shift per week.
Result: Case resolved and defendant avoids incarceration.
January 12, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
Hazardous Materials not Allowed in Tunnel 730 CMR 7.10
Title 730 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations prohibits passenger or commercial vehicles carrying any amount of hazardous material, excluding those materials required for the actual operation of the vehicle, to enter or to use the Tunnels. The defendant, a West Virginia paint company, received multiple citations for entering the Thomas P. O'Neil Tunnel with buckets of paint primer, finish, caulking and cans of gas. The citations charged both the driver and the corporation. The client hired Attorney Topazio. Today after a Clerk's hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find the driver not responsible, thus preserving his clean driving record, upon acceptance of responsibility of a single violation by the corporation.
Result: Defendant operator not responsible, corporation accepts responsibility, case closed.
January 7, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
Speeding MGL c. 90 § 17
The defendant, a resident of Illinois, who was in Boston for a convention, received a citation for speeding. The citation indicated that the defendant was allegedly caught on Lidar traveling 61 mph in a 45 mph zone. The client hired Attorney Topazio. LIDAR is an acronym for LIght Detection And Ranging. A police laser emits a highly focused beam of invisible light, in the near infrared region of light that is centered at 904nm of wavelength and is only about 22 inches (56cm) in diameter at 1000 feet (300m). Unlike police RADAR which directly determines a vehicle's speed by measuring its doppler shift, police laser-lidar calculates speed by observing the changing amount of time is takes to "see" reflected pulses of light over a discreet amount of time. Today after a Clerk's hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find his client not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
December 2, 2009
East Boston District Court
0905 CR 1936
Unlicensed Operation M.G.L. c. 90, § 10
Logan-Speeding over posted limit 740 CMR § 21.51
Seat Belt, Fail Wear M.G.L. c. 90, § 13A
The defendant, who resides in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, was visiting Massachusetts for a convention and received a criminal citation after getting lost at Logan International Airport trying to find the Ted Williams Tunnel, hired Attorney Topazio after receiving a summons to appear in court. The client informed Attorney Topazio that due to extenuating circumstances, she preferred not to return to Massachusetts and wanted him to waive her presence in court and to resolve her case in her absence. According to the Criminal Rules of Procedure, Rule 7(b), Attorney Topazio filed his appearance in court, advanced his client's case and waived her appearance at her arraignment. Attorney Topazio represented to the court that he had his client's authority to resolve her case in her absence, provided the court would allow; which it did. After conferencing the case with the District Attorney and the judge, Attorney Topazio caused his client to be found not responsible on both the civil infractions and represented to court, that if the remaining criminal charge were dismissed, that his client would pay $150.00 in court costs in lieu of returning to Massachusetts to fight the charge; and the court agreed. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court, with the District Attorney's consent, to give his client until December 30, 2009 to pay $150.00 before dismissing the case.
Result: Defendant found not responsible on civil infractions and criminal charge to be dismissed upon payment of court costs.
December 1, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
0901CR0845
Motion to Reconsider Sentence
Possession Class B, MGL c. 94C § 34
The defendant was charged with Possession of Class B, two counts of ABPO and resisting arrest, when he was found to be in possession of aspirin which the police believed to be cocaine. Despite Attorney Topazio arguing that the substance that was found was aspirin, his client who was in custody on a probation detainer on a different case and bail on this case, decided to tender a plea. The Commonwealth argued that the substance found, on visual inspection, appeared to be cocaine and would not dismiss that charge. Attorney Topazio requested that as a condition of the original plea wanted the court to order the Commonwealth to provide him with a copy of the drug certification and to reconsider the sentence should the drugs test negative, which they subsequently did. Today, after the Commonwealth dismissed the drug charge, on the oral motion to reconsider argued by Attorney Topazio, Attorney Topazio tried to convert his client's sentence (which was a split sentence with 3 years supervised probation including the requirement of completing the Office of Community Corrections Level III program) into a time served sentence on the remaining counts, but that did not happen. Instead Attorney Topazio persuaded the court to strike the condition that his client complete OCC Level III and further caused the court to switch his client's probation form supervised to unsupervised. Community Corrections Centers are community based, intensive supervision sites, which deliver bundled sanctions and services, including treatment and education, to high risk offenders via Intermediate Sanction Levels. Intermediate Sanction Level III is an intense level of community-based, criminal justice supervision. Sanctions and services required at this level of supervision represent a daily imposition upon the liberty of the offender. Level III participants are required to report to the community corrections center for one to four hours per day, three to five days per week. Offenders placed at Intermediate Sanction Level III may be monitored via electronic device. Level III also requires random drug and alcohol testing, and attendance at one four hour community service shift per week.
Result: Guilty plea revoked after negative drug certification and probation modified from supervised to unsupervised.
November 16, 2009
Chelsea District Court
0814CR1476
Probation Violation
Motion to Revise and Revoke
Aggravated A&B M.G.L. c. 265, § 13A(b)
The defendant who had pled guilty on October 5, 2009 to aggravated assault and battery as a result of causing a large laceration to his girlfriend's head, received a suspended sentence with the condition, among other things, of attending Level III of the Office of Community Corrections. In the early 1990's the Commonwealth commenced a systemic effort to provide for more effective and efficient criminal justice sentencing and specifically address prison overcrowding. As a result, the Office of Community Corrections was established in 1996 by virtue of Massachusetts General Law chapter 211F. The Office of Community Corrections is a division of the Office of the Commissioner of Probation. Community Corrections Centers are community based, intensive supervision sites, which deliver bundled sanctions and services, including treatment and education, to high risk offenders via Intermediate Sanction Levels. Intermediate Sanction Level III is an intense level of community-based, criminal justice supervision. Sanctions and services required at this level of supervision represent a daily imposition upon the liberty of the offender. Level III participants are required to report to the community corrections center for one to four hours per day, three to five days per week. Offenders placed at Intermediate Sanction Level III may be monitored via electronic device. Level III also requires random drug and alcohol testing, and attendance at one four hour community service shift per week. After refusing to attend Level III of the Office of Community Corrections, the defendant received a Notice of Probation Violation from his probation officer, sought assistance from Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio initially convinced the court not to hold his client on a probation detainer, arguing that a series of recent events rendered his client homeless and thus incapable of complying with the terms of his probation. Attorney Topazio met with the supervising probation officer and the chief probation officer and convinced them to modify the terms of the sentence if his client entered an inpatient residential program. Today, in order to avoid a final probation hearing, Attorney Topazio filed a Motion to Revise and Revoke the original sentence asking the Court to strike the requirement that his client complete OCC Level III and instead to complete an inpatient ½ way house program, and the court agreed.
Result: Probation Violation Withdrawn and sentence modified
November 6, 2009
Dorchester District Court
0907 CR 3953
Utter False Prescription M.G.L. c. 94C, § 33 E
The defendant, a professional person and recovering addict, was accused of presenting a forged prescription for the prescription medication Dilaudid which was in the name of a third party, who had been waiting outside the pharmacy. Dilaudid is an analgesic narcotic with an addiction liability similar to that of morphine. Dilaudid is approximately 8 times more potent on a milligram basis than morphine and is often called "drug store heroin" on the streets. After noticing the drug's name on the prescription was spelled wrong, the pharmacist called the doctor and confirmed the prescription was bad, who thereafter called the police. When questioned by police, the defendant gave inconsistent statements and acknowledged that he was on the verge of a relapse to explain his actions, hired Attorney Topazio to defend him. Attorney Topazio's primary concern was to avoid a conviction, (which would protect his client's record) and at the same time insuring that his client did not lose his job due to a felony conviction. Attorney Topazio obtained his client's medical records to substantiate his client's course of treatment and prescription medications for court and in the process learned that his client became addicted to prescription medications following a medical procedure several years ago. Attorney Topazio recreated a chronology for the court including the factors which caused his client to lose tract of his own recovery, and presented same to the District Attorney in an attempt to resolve the matter. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court, over the District Attorney's objection, to give his client an administrative CWOF (continuance without a finding) for six months and thus avoided trial and consequences of a possible conviction. Administrative probation relieves the probationer of the reporting obligations associated with supervised probation.
Result: Defendant accepted a CWOF thus avoiding a trial and a conviction on his record, and preserves his employment.
October 29, 2009
Lowell District Court
0811CR6509
0911CR4955
Probation Surrender
Disorderly Conduct MGL c. 272 § 53
Assault and Battery Dangerous Weapon M.G.L. c. 265, § 15A(b)
The defendant was on probation for allegedly striking his son in the face with his belt, causing one of his teeth to be knocked out, hired Attorney Topazio when he received a Notice of Probation Violation and Hearing after testing positive for cocaine and alcohol, and for being arrested for disorderly conduct. On a prior date (see entry for September 17, 2009) Attorney Topazio caused the disorderly charge to be dismissed but still had to deal with his client's positive urine screens to avoid a violation of probation. Attorney Topazio met with the supervising probation officer and argued that the sentencing judge did not require that his client abstain from alcohol, but rather ordered that his client not engage in excessive drinking, which would not be a violation of his client's probation. Attorney Topazio scheduled his client's case before the sentencing judge for a clarification of the probation conditions and today, convinced the judge to vacate the testing requirement altogether. As a result, the Notice of Probation violation was withdrawn.
Result: Violation of probation withdrawn; probation renewed to its original date; and Defendant signs a new probation contract without the requirement for random urine testing.
October 26, 2009
Suffolk Superior Court
SUCR2007-10889
Trafficking in Cocaine M.G.L. c. 94C § 32E(b)
School Zone Violation M.G.L. c. 94C § 32J
Possessing a Firearm Without an FID Card M.G.L. c. 269 § 10(h)
Possessing a Firearm Without an FID Card M.G.L. c. 269 § 10(h)
The defendant was arrested after Massachusetts State Police executed a search warrant for his home which alleged, among other things, that the police received information from a confidential informant that the defendant was selling Cocaine from his home. During the execution of the warrant, the police found a large sum of money, cocaine, a firearm and ammunition. The defendant, who was facing mandatory jail time, hired Attorney Topazio to defend him. Attorney Topazio filed a Motion to Suppress along with a Memorandum of Law attacking the legality of the search warrant, knowing that if the search was unconstitutional, then the evidence would be excluded and the Commonwealth would have no case. Attorney Topazio argued that where information from a confidential informant is relied upon to supply probable cause to obtain a search warrant, Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights requires that the affidavit apprise the magistrate (who decides whether to issue the search warrant) of sufficient facts and circumstances to establish both: "(1) the basis of the informant's knowledge, and (2) the credibility of the informant or the reliability of his information. Commonwealth v. O'Day, 440 Mass. 296, 301 (2003); Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 Mass. 363 (1985); Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964). In Massachusetts, the first prong, or the "basis of knowledge test," may be satisfied by evidence that "the informant had personally purchased drugs from the defendant." Such "direct knowledge" maybe inferred where the level of detail in the informant's tip regarding the identity of the seller and the drug-selling operation is "consistent with personal observation, not mere recitation of a casual rumor." The second prong, or the "veracity test," is commonly satisfied by reference in the affidavit to such factors as: the informant's successful track record of providing information to the police; the ability of the police to locate and contact the informant despite his/her anonymity in the affidavit; and the informant's recitation of "precise," "unique" and "predictive" detail. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney to place the trafficking charge on file, dismiss the school zone charge, and to accept a 2 year suspended sentence on the firearm's charge, and the Court agreed.
Result: School zone and possession of ammunition charges dismissed; trafficking in cocaine charge placed on file and defendant receives a two year suspended sentence on the possession of a firearm charge, thus avoiding mandatory jail time altogether.
October 21, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Failure to Stop MGL c. 89 § 9
The defendant, a Boston Cab driver, received a citation for failing to stop and represented himself at the initial clerk's hearing, but was found responsible by a Clerk Magistrate, hired Attorney Topazio for his appeal before a Judge of the court. Today after argument, Attorney Topazio persuaded the Court that his client did not violate the law arguing that the officer's view of his client stopping would have been obstructed by a building based on the officer's viewpoint and what the officer in fact saw was his client's second attempt to enter the flow of traffic.
Result: Defendant not responsible, prior ruling reversed, case closed.
October 15, 2009
Suffolk Superior Court
09-4269
Restraining Order (Non dating relationship nor household member)
The alleged victim (who is related to the defendant but did not live with her) alleged that the defendant and her fiancé came to his home and broke in and maliciously damaged his property, filed a complaint in Superior Court requesting a restraining order issue against the defendant. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent her at the hearing for the permanent restraining order. In Massachusetts, most restraining orders sought for protection are governed by Massachusetts General Laws chapter 209A. Under G.L. c. 209A a "family or household member" who claims to have suffered abuse can apply to the appropriate District Court for a restraining order to protect her against the actions of an alleged abuser. If the alleged victim, as in this case, is neither a family member nor household member of the alleged abuser, the alleged victim must apply to the Superior Court for injunctive relief. Today after hearing Attorney Topazio persuaded the court not to issue the restraining order for one year as requested but rather to extend it two months so as to give the parties the opportunity to see if matters could cool down before the Christmas holiday, with the intent of dismissing that order, and the court agreed.
Result: Restraining Order extended two months to give parties opportunity to cool down.
October 9, 2009
Quincy District Court
200956RO0816
Restraining Order MGL c. 209A
The wife of the defendant recently filed for divorce and served the defendant with divorce papers, yet still lived with her husband. Prior to a hearing on temporary motions in the divorce case, the wife went to the Quincy District Court and obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order against her husband of 24 years. Ex parte means the wife appeared in court without giving notice to her husband when she obtained the temporary order. Prior to the hearing on the Permanent Order, the defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Today, after conducting a full hearing, Attorney Topazio, was successful through effective cross-examination in challenging the wife's credibility and convinced the Court that the actions of the wife to file for a restraining order were most probably motivated by a desire to get leverage in the recently filed divorce case and not because she was in fear of her safety. Through cross examination Attorney Topazio elicited testimony that there was no history of abuse, prior restraining orders or police intervention between the parties. Today Attorney Topazio persuaded the Court not to issue the permanent 209A Order.
Result: Permanent 209A Order not granted.
September 22, 2009
Haverhill District Court
Speeding MGL c. 90 § 17
The defendant, an active member of the United States Marine Corps, who recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq, received a citation for speeding. The citation indicated that the defendant was allegedly caught on Lidar traveling 98 mph in a 65 mph zone. The client hired Attorney Topazio. Today after a Clerk's hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find his client not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
September 17, 2009
Lowell District Court
0911CR4955
Disorderly Conduct MGL c. 272 § 53
The defendant, who was on probation in Lowell on a different matter, was arrested for Disorderly conduct after becoming loud, yelling profanities and making derogative remarks to the Chelmsford Police and those associated with the police, with the purpose of annoying and harassing them. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio attacked the basis of the charge arguing that his client did not have the purpose to cause a public inconvenience as required by statute. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss the charge against his client, and the Court agreed.
Result: Case dismissed.
September 16, 2009
Suffolk Superior Court
SUC2009-10329
Trafficking in Cocaine over 200 grams MGL c. 94C § 32E(b)
The defendant, who had flown to the United States from the Dominican Republic, appeared to Customs Officials to have ingested narcotics, was arrested as a drug courier when she arrived at Logan International Airport. Massachusetts State Police were called and learned that the defendant had been on a 24 hour watch list based on federal investigative information regarding the defendant possibly being a drug courier. When the defendant disembarked from her flight she was deferred to a secondary inspection station. During the secondary inspection, customs Enforcement asked the defendant several questions eliciting responses that gave rise to further suspicion of the defendant. The defendant, who appeared lethargic, was presented with a Spanish consent form regarding the use of an X-Ray in which she voluntarily signed, as officials feared that ingested narcotics had entered her bloodstream. The defendant was transferred to a local hospital where it was discovered that the defendant had ingested several items consistent with drug smuggling. Over the course of three days, the defendant passed 53 pellets containing cocaine weighing approximately 530 grams through her alimentary canal. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to defend her. Trafficking over 200 grams of cocaine carries a punishment of a term of imprisonment in the state prison for not less than fifteen nor more than twenty years. According to statute, no sentence imposed under the provisions of this clause shall be for less than a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of fifteen years and a fine of not less than fifty thousand nor more than five hundred thousand dollars may be imposed but not in lieu of the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment. After months of investigation and negotiations, Attorney Topazio persuaded the District Attorney to reduce the charges against his client upon a change of plea whereby his client would plea to trafficking in cocaine over 14 grams but less than twenty-eight grams and receive a sentence of 5 to 7 years incarcerated with a three year mandatory. Trafficking over Fourteen grams or more but less than twenty-eight grams, carries a punishment of a term of imprisonment in the state prison for not less than three nor more than fifteen years. According to the term of this lesser offense no sentence imposed under the provisions of this clause shall be for less than a minimum term of imprisonment of three years, and a fine of not less than two thousand five hundred nor more than twenty-five thousand dollars may be imposed but not in lieu of the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment. Today, despite the strength of the Commonwealth's case, Attorney Topazio negotiated a plea bargain with the District Attorney resulting in a triple breakdown of the trafficking offense thus avoiding a fifteen year mandatory jail term.
Result: Defendant receives a sentence of five to seven, three years of that being mandatory, upon a change of plea and thus avoids a mandatory fifteen year jail sentence.
August 31, 2009
Newburyport District Court
0922CR0164
Operating with a Suspended License MGL c. 90 § 23
Possession of Heroin, Class A MGL c. 94C c. 34
The defendant was arrested when a Registry of Motor Vehicle check of his registration conducted by the police indicated that his license was suspended. A search of his motor vehicle revealed a bottle cap with residue that the arresting officer suspected to be heroin residue. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio pushed his client's case to trial. Today, relying on the recent case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009), Attorney Topazio was effective in getting the case against his client dismissed at trial because the Commonwealth could not prove the residue found in the bottle cap in the defendant's motor vehicle was a controlled substance without the testimony of a chemist. Prior to Melendez-Diaz, it was standard practice in drug cases for the Commonwealth to rely only upon a certified copy of a drug certificate to prove that a substance was a controlled substance. Melendez-Diaz is a Supreme Court decision which now requires that a chemist must testify in cases where a drug certificate is to be introduced at trial. In the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts ruling on June 25, 2009, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for a 5-4 majority, held that the introduction of a drug certificate without the testimony of a chemist violated the defendant's confrontation rights under the Sixth Amendment. Attorney Topazio reliance on this decision was effective in getting his client's case dismissed.
Result: Case dismissed.
August 24, 2009
Cambridge District Court
0952CR1837
OUI-Liquor or .08% MGL c. 90 § 24(1)(a)(1)
Marked Lanes Violation MGL c. 89 § 4A
The defendant crashed his motor vehicle into a Jersey barrier tearing the front wheel off his motor vehicle. After flunking field sobriety tests and after registering a .203 on a portable breath test, the defendant was arrested. While at the police station, the defendant submitted to a breath test and registered a .18. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Today despite the Commonwealth's recommendation for a conviction, the defendant received a CWOF or continuance without a finding, which is not a conviction under state law, instead of receiving a conviction.
Result: Defendant avoids jail time and a conviction on his record.
August 19, 2009
Framingham Juvenile Court
Application for Criminal
Breaking an Entering a Motor Vehicle MGL c. 266 § 16A
Receiving Stolen Property MGL c. 266 § 60
The parents of the defendant, a juvenile with ambitions of going to college, hired Attorney Topazio to represent the juvenile at a clerk's hearing after he was stopped by police and accused by witnesses who alleged that he entered to a parked motor vehicle and removed items therefrom while at a local movie theater. Whoever in the nighttime or daytime breaks and enters a building, ship, vessel or vehicle with intent to commit a misdemeanor shall be punished by a fine of not more than two hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or both. Today through unrelenting questioning of the investigating officer challenging the viability of the Commonwealth's case, Attorney Topazio convinced the Clerk Magistrate not to issue complaints against his client.
Result: Defendant not charged, case closed, and criminal record preserved.
August 18, 2009
Malden District Court
0950CR0025
Assault with Dangerous Weapon MGL c. 265 § 15B (b)
Assault and Battery MGL c. 265 § 13A (a)
The defendant who was on probation was arrested for assault with a dangerous weapon and assault and batter after swinging a chair at an employee of a local café, then arguing with him, and then grabbing him by the throat, hired Attorney Topazio. Whoever, by means of a dangerous weapon, commits an assault upon another shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or imprisonment in jail for not more than two and one-half years. Attorney Topazio represented this client at the initial surrender proceeding an prevented his client's probation from being revoked. Today at trial, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the Commonwealth to file a Nolle Proseque or (Nol Pros) causing his client's case to be dismissed.
Result: Case dismissed.
August 14, 2009
Salem District Court
0836CR4096
Utter a False Prescription MGL c. 94C § 33 (b)
Obtaining a Drug by Fraud MGL c. 94C § 33 (b)
The defendant was arrested after forging prescriptions and obtaining medications from various pharmacies including CVS, Walgreen's and OSCO Drugs. The defendant was told after several pre-trial conferences that he was facing jail time, was unsatisfied with the advice he was receiving and discharged his former counsel, and hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio attached each incident of fraud, viewed surveillance videos, and challenged the Commonwealth's evidence. Today despite the Commonwealth's recommendation for a conviction, and through intense negotiations, the defendant received a CWOF or continuance without a finding, which is not a conviction under state law, instead of receiving a felony conviction.
Result: Defendant avoids jail time and a felony conviction on his record.
August 10, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Clerk's Hearing
Larceny Over $250.00 MGL c. 266 § 30
Shoplifting MGL c. 266 § 30A
The defendant was summonsed to Court to answer to a charge of shoplifting after she took the tags off merchandise from Saks Fifth Avenue in Boston totaling $593.00 and attempted to leave the store without paying. The defendant who was not a citizen, and faced the possibility of deportation, denial of naturalization or exclusion from the United States, hired Attorney Topazio. Despite the summons on a charge of shoplifting, the Commonwealth upgraded the charges to felony larceny. Whoever steals, or with intent to defraud obtains by a false pretence, or whoever unlawfully, and with intent to steal or embezzle, converts, or secretes with intent to convert, the property of another as defined whether such property is or is not in his possession at the time of such conversion or secreting, shall be guilty of larceny, and if the value of the property stolen exceeds two hundred and fifty dollars, be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years, or by a fine of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars and imprisonment in jail for not more than two years. Today, despite the Commonwealth's upgrading the charges to the felony of larceny over $250.00, Attorney Topazio convinced the Magistrate not to issue the complaint against his client.
Result: Case dismissed.
July 31, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Suffolk Superior Court
0901CR2851
0901CR5411
Attempt to Commit a Crime MGL c. 274 § 6
Armed Assault in Dwelling MGL c. 265 c. 18A
Malicious Destruction of Property MGL c. 266 § 12
Assault and Battery MGL c 265 §13A
B&E Nighttime for Felony MGL c. 266 § 16
When a late night roof deck party got out of hand resulting in eggs being thrown off a four story building at the defendant, the defendant was arrested after being accused of using a crow bar to break into the victim's apartment then violently pushing him to the ground with that crow bar, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with the District Attorney prosecuting his client in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the case prior to his client being indicated and thus having to face state prison time. Armed assault in a Dwelling carries a penalty of 20 years to life. According to statute, whoever, being armed with a dangerous weapon, enters a dwelling house and while therein assaults another with intent to commit a felony shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life, or for a term of not less than 20 years. Today, despite Attorney Topazio's attempts to negotiate a resolution of the case by way of mediation and his client ultimately being indicated, Attorney Topazio was successful in obtaining a plea bargain for his client in the District Court before his client was arraigned in Superior Court on the more serious charges. After the plea in the District Court, Attorney Topazio agreed with the Commonwealth that the Commonwealth would file a Nolle Proseque or (Nol Pros) causing his client's Superior Court charges to be dismissed.
Result: The defendant receives a split sentence to the House of Corrections, having only to serve four months, thus avoiding Superior Court and mandatory State prison time.
July 28, 2009
Brighton District Court
Appeal from Magistrate Hearing
The defendant who was cited for speeding contested the ticket. As the initial Magistrate Hearing the defendant was found responsible and appealed, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, after a full hearing before the Court, Attorney Topazio convinced the Court to find his client not responsible.
Result: Not responsible and case closed.
July 22, 2009
Registry of Motor Vehicle
Hardship License
The defendant, who lost his license for three (3) years for a drug related offense hired Attorney Topazio to get his driving privileges back. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the Board of Appeal on Motor Vehicle Liability Polices and Bonds to restore his client's driving privileges with a restricted or so called "Cinderella License".
Result: Driving privileges restored.
July 21, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
0901 CR 1108
Witness Intimidation M.G.L. c. 268, § 13B
The defendant, who went to Suffolk Superior Court to support the family of an individual who pled guilty to kidnapping and received a committed sentence, was charged with the felony offense of witness intimidation after police, who were escorting the victim from Superior Court, observed the defendant yelling at the victim who had just testified. Attorney Topazio challenged the charge in District Court by filing a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Commonwealth v. DiBennadetto, 436 Mass. 319, 764 N.E. 2d 338 (2002); alleging that his client’s conduct consisting as it did merely of language which was overheard and then described as intimidation, falls outside of the purview of §13B because it occurred after the criminal proceeding at which the victim testified had ended. Attorney Topazio argued that the Commonwealth could not prove that the defendant had the specific intent to impede any criminal proceeding as required by statute arguing that the commitment of the defendant in Superior Court at his sentencing, where there are no rights of appeal, in fact, and in law, mark the end of the criminal proceedings. Although unsuccessful on the Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Topazio moved for trial. Today at trial, Attorney Topazio renewed his request to dismiss the charges arguing again that the Commonwealth could not prove its case. Attorney Topazio focused on the fact that the Commonwealth could not prove that his client intended to impede, obstruct, delay, harm, or punish any criminal proceeding as required by statute as the proceeding in question had ended. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Commonwealth to reduce the felony charge of witness intimidation to the misdemeanor charge of threats where his client accepted a CWOF (continuance without a finding) and thus avoided trial.
Result: Felony charges against the defendant were reduced to a misdemeanor where she accepted a CWOF thus avoiding a trial and a conviction on her record.
July 17, 2009
South Boston District Court
0903 CR 0264
Possession with intent to Distribute Class D M.G.L. c.94C § 32C(a)
Possession class D (civil infraction) M.G.L. c.94C § 32L
The defendant was arrested after being observed by undercover police leaving a known drug house. After stopping the defendant, he was arrested after officers observed in plain view a bag of marijuana. The defendant was also in possession of a large sum of money and two cell phones. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to defend him. Attorney Topazio met with the prosecuting attorney and through intense negotiations, convinced the Commonwealth to reduce the possession with intent to distribute class D charge to straight possession of class D, and since the amount of marijuana was not over one (1) ounce, moved to decriminalize the charge pursuant to M.G.L. c.94C § 32L whereupon the court fined the defendant $100.00.
Result: Case decriminalized and Defendant fined civilly $100.00. The defendant avoids trial, potential jail time, a criminal record, and a potential suspension of his driving privileges.
July 15, 2009
Dorchester District Court
0949 CR 0105
Possession with intent to Distribute Class D M.G.L. c.94C § 32C(a)
School Zone Violation M.G.L. c.94C § 32J
The defendant who was on probation, was arrested when his probation officer and Boston Police made a home visit to effectuate a probation warrant and observed in plain view a plastic bag filled with marijuana. The defendant who was placed under arrest for the probation warrant gave written consent to the police to search his bedroom. In addition to the marijuana the officers recovered a digital scale, numerous plastic baggies, 2 cellular phones, a passport and United States Currency. The defendant who was additionally charged with possession with intent to distribute class D in a school zone, and faced a mandatory 2 year sentence on the school zone violation if convicted, was represented by different counsel. After being committed on a probation violation for eleven (11) months, the client fired his attorney after being advised to plea to the possession with intent charge and receive a split sentence with an additional three (3) years probation, and hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney to dismiss the school zone charge as well as to reduce the possession with intent charge to straight possession on the condition that his client receive a three (3) month committed sentence concurrent with the sentence he is now serving so as not to interfere with his client’s parole date.
Result: School zone and possession with intent to distribute charges dismissed and defendant receives a three month committed sentence concurrent with the sentence he is now serving, thus avoiding additional jail time and probation once released from custody.
July 14, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
0901CR1109
Arraignment on Criminal Complaint
Larceny by Check over $250.00 M.G.L. c. 266, § 37
The defendant, a professional person, was accused of larceny by check and charged. The defendant, who was successful in getting his case remanded to a clerk’s hearing, hired counsel to represent him at the clerk’s hearing, but was unsuccessful in resolving the case and had the charges reissued. The defendant fired his attorney and hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio worked out a settlement with the complainant and her attorney and had the parties sign an accord and satisfaction. Attorney Topazio further had the Court, with the District Attorney’s consent continue the arraignment to a future date so as to give his client time to pay pursuant to the agreement and to avoid an entry on his client’s board of probation record with the agreement to dismiss the case prior to arraignment if his client pays in full prior to the next court date. An entry on a board of probation record would only be made after arraignment.
Result: Case settled and defendant is not arraigned thus avoiding an entry on his board of probation record and Criminal charges to be dismissed provided payment is made before the next court date.
July 8, 2009
Attleboro District Court
0834 CR 5114
OUI Liquor M.G.L. c. 90 § 24(1)(a)(1)
Marked Lanes Violation M.G.L. c. 89 § 4A
Possession open container of alcohol in MV M.G.L. c. 90 § 24I
A&B on Police Officer M.G.L. c. 265 § 13D
Resist Arrest M.G.L. c. 268 § 32B
Possession of Chemical Mace without FID Card M.G.L. c. 269 § 10(h)
On 12/4/08, the defendant’s motor vehicle was stopped by State Police after several civilians radioed police that the defendant’s vehicle was operating erratically. After stopping the defendant, the officers detected an overwhelming odor of alcoholic beverage coming from the defendant, ordered her out of her vehicle and asked her to submit to field sobriety tests. The defendant who had difficulty exiting her vehicle could not complete the tests, used her car for balance and eventually sat on the ground. The officer arrested the defendant for OUI based on their observation that the defendant had slurred speech, engaged in uncoordinated behavior, and had an inability to focus on questions and instructions. After the defendant was placed in handcuffs, she refused to get into the police cruiser, and kicked the officer in the legs. The defendant’s motor vehicle was inventoried and an open vodka bottle was found as well as a container of Chemical Mace, for which the defendant had no license. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to defend her. Attorney Topazio was aware that his client, who was a professional and licensed by the Commonwealth, would be at risk of losing her license if convicted of A&B on a Police Officer. Attorney Topazio contacted the prosecuting police officer and worked out an agreed plea whereby all counts against his client would be dismissed upon his client admitting to sufficient facts and receive a CWOF to the OUI and resisting arrest. A CWOF is a continuance without a finding and is not a conviction under state law.
Result: All charges dismissed after defendant accepts a negotiated plea of CWOF to the OUI and Resisting Arrest charges.
July 7, 2009
Salem District Court
Clerk’s Hearing
Speeding M.G.L. c. 90 § 17
The defendant, a resident of Florida, with a summer home in Maine, had flown to Boston and was proceeding to Maine when he received a citation for speeding. The citation indicated that the defendant was allegedly caught on Lidar traveling 92 mph in a 65 mph zone. The client hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio continued the hearing from its scheduled date to accommodate his client’s traveling schedule. Today after a Clerk’s hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find his client not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
July 1, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Application for Criminal Complaint
Marked Lanes Violation M.G.L. c. 89 § 4A
Operating with Suspended Registration M.G.L. c. 90 § 23
On 04/30/09, the defendant, a college student with no criminal record, was operating a BMW owned by his father from California, made an improper lane change while on Charles Street in Boston and struck a parked Taxi. The defendant was cited for marked lanes violation and suspended registration, (a criminal violation). Following the accident the defendant, who returned to California, hired Attorney Topazio. Today Attorney Topazio appeared in the Boston Municipal Court at a Magistrate Hearing and was successful in persuading the court to deny the criminal charge of a suspended registration upon the condition that his client agree that he be found responsible of the civil infraction of marked lanes violation pursuant to M.G.L. ch. 89 §4A. The Court agreed with this compromise; denied the criminal complaint, found the defendant responsible of the civil infraction only, assessed a civil fine, and continued the case for payment.
Result: Criminal charge denied.
June 23, 2009
Quincy District Court
0756 CR 8157
Probation Surrender
Operating Under the Influence, 2nd Offense M.G.L. c. 90 § 24
The defendant who was on probation after he plead guilty to a second offense drunk driving charge and received a 90 day suspended sentence, received a Notice of Probation Violation and Hearing after testing positive for THC (marijuana) on six separate occasions, failing to appear for a scheduled urine test, testing positive for Benzodiazepines, being in arrears on court fees and failing to complete a required alcohol program. After receiving the Notice of Probation Violation and Hearing, the defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio made sure his client cured all technical violations, such as completing all required programs and paying all monies due the court. Next Attorney Topazio met with the supervising probation officer and negotiated an agreement whereby his client would stipulate to a violation at the initial surrender hearing instead of having a full evidentiary hearing on the condition that his client receive as a punishment 10 hours of community service instead of being committed for 90 days or being forced into a relapse program. Probation and the Court agreed.
Result: Defendant stipulates to a violation, has his probation renewed and is punished with community service hours instead of committed time.
June 16, 2009
West Roxbury District Court
0606 CR 3998
Fail to Stop for Police M.G.L. c. 90 § 25
Speeding M.G.L. c. 90 § 17
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 § 24
On 12/14/06, the defendant’s motor vehicle was observed by Boston Police for (1) failing to stop for a police officer, (2) speeding and (3) operating a motor vehicle negligently. On 12/14/06 a motor vehicle citation (citation #1) alleging (1) failure to stop, (2) operating to endanger and (3) speeding was written but not mailed or given to the defendant. The original citation (citation #1) was filed with the Court. The defendant who was not arrested nevertheless received in the mail motor vehicle citation (citation #2) on or about 12/28/06 only alleging non-criminal motor vehicle violation of Failure to Stop which he paid $100.00 to the Registry of Motor vehicles on 02/02/07. Both Citations were issued purporting to be in compliance with the requirement of G.L. c. 90C, §2, but only (citation #2) issued on or about 12/28/06 was mailed to the defendant. Since the defendant never answered on (citation #1) he was defaulted by the court. After the defendant was arraigned on the criminal charges, Attorney Topazio was hired. Attorney Topazio attacked the pending criminal charges by filing a Motion to Dismiss the complaint pursuant to G.L. c. 90C, § 2, which section of the General Laws allows a Court to dismiss the pending criminal charges when a defendant is not giving a copy of the citation at the time and place of the violation which according to statute “shall constitute a defense at any court proceeding for such violation…” Today, Attorney Topazio over the Commonwealth’s objection convinced the Court to dismiss all charges against his client pursuant to G.L. c. 90C, § 2 the so called “No-Fix” statute.
Result: All charges dismissed
June 6, 2009
Wrentham District Court
0857 CR 3312
Threat to Commit Crime M.G.L. c. 275 § 2
Criminal Harassment M.G.L. c. 265 § 43A(a)
The defendant, a High School Senior, was suspended for fighting with a fellow classmate, then criminally charged for allegedly harassing and threatening that classmate and another while at a school sponsored sporting event. As a condition of release, the client was ordered to have no contact with the alleged victims, a difficult task since all parties attended the same High School. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted school officials to see if they would be willing to mediate the situation if the parties consented. After speaking with Director of Student Affairs and then meeting with the Principal of the High School, Attorney Topazio filed a motion with the court amending his client’s conditions of release to allow supervised contact with the complainants only in a structured setting of the High School and in the presence of each party’s parents and High School Officials. Attorney Topazio arranged for his client and his client’s parents along with the complainants and their parents to engage in a voluntary mediation with the Principal and Director of Student Affairs from the High School. Mediation was a success as all parties were in agreement in resolving the situation. Today, Attorney Topazio with the consent of the District Attorney caused his client’s case to be dismissed.
Result: Mediation a success and all charges dismissed.
June 3, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Clerk’s Hearing
Speeding in Work Zone M.G.L. c. 90 § 17
The defendant received a citation after allegedly speeding in a movie set work zone. Today after a Clerk’s hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find the defendant not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
June 2, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
Application for Criminal Complaint
Revoked Registration M.G.L. c. 90 § 23
Uninsured Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 § 34J
Excessive Tint M.G.L. c. 90 § 9D
The defendant received an application for criminal complaint after allegedly allowing his insurance on his motor vehicle to lapse when he left the country for employment overseas. When the defendant returned to the United States to take his motor vehicle to a dealer for sale, he was stopped by State Police and charged. Attorney Topazio produced evidence that his client’s motor vehicle was placed for sale and that the tint was removed from the vehicle. Today after a Clerk’s hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint against his client.
Result: Defendant not charged, record preserved, case closed.
May 19, 2009
Brighten District Court
Appeal form Magistrate’s Hearing
Speeding M.G.L. c. 90 § 18
Red Light Violation c. 89 § 9
The defendant received a citation after allegedly speeding and running a red light. The defendant was unsuccessful at a Clerk Magistrate’s hearing, hired Attorney Topazio. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the Court to find the defendant not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
May 14, 2009
Waltham District Court
0951CR0202
Utter False Prescription M.G.L. c. 94C, § 33 E
The defendant, a professional person, was accused of altering several written prescriptions for the prescription medication for Adderall that she was prescribed by her doctor. After being summonsed to court for arraignment on three (3) counts of uttering a false prescription, the client hired Attorney Topazio to defend her. Attorney Topazio contacted the prosecuting officer and presented his client’s version of facts in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the case. He also provided the Commonwealth with a copy of his client’s medical records. When Attorney Topazio appeared in court for arraignment of his client, who had no criminal record, he convinced the District Attorney not to arraign his client and the case was continued for further arraignment. The reason for the continuance was to protect his client’s record since once an individual is arraigned, the charges will appear on that person’s CORI. The continuance further gave the District Attorney the opportunity to review his client’s medical records. Despite the allegations, his client had valid prescriptions for Adderall prescribed by her doctor. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney and the Court to dismiss two (2) charges of uttering a false prescription prior to arraignment and secured a disposition of pre-trial probation for his client on the last charge.
Result: Criminal charges dismissed prior to arraignment mean they will not show up on his client’s CORI and the remaining count is disposed of by way of pre-trial probation thus avoiding an admission to a felony charge.
May 13, 2009
Lawrence District Court
0818aCR2352
Probation Surrender
Possession Class A M.G.L. c. 94C, § 34
The defendant, a traffic manager employed by a 3rd party logistics provider, who was on probation with a CWOF for the charge of possession of a class A substance, heroin, was stopped while operating a motor vehicle with a revoked license, and was arrested for same. During a search of the defendant’s motor vehicle, a bottle cap with residue believed to be heroin was found in the defendant’s car, and the defendant was also arrested for possession of a class A substance, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with the supervising probation officer who wanted to revoke the CWOF and impose a guilty finding, which would have the collateral consequence of suspending the defendant’s driver’s license for one year. Today in court, Attorney Topazio convinced a judge, over probation’s objections, to find a violation of the defendant’s probation, but not to revoke the CWOF, but rather to impose the same terms and conditions of probation previously imposed.
Result: The defendant is found in violation of his probation but his CWOF is not revoked, the defendant avoids jail and his right to operate of motor vehicle is not revoked.
May 12, 2009
Lowell District Court
0811 CR 6509
Assault and Battery Dangerous Weapon M.G.L. c. 265, § 15A(b)
The defendant was charged for allegedly striking his son in the face with his belt, causing one of his teeth to be knocked out, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio appeared with his client during an investigation by the Department of Family and Children after a 51A complaint was filed alleging neglect. Attorney Topazio caused his client to enter counseling and to take an anger management program and parenting classes while at the same time preparing the case for trial. Today, on the day of trial, Attorney Topazio, during a lobby conference, convinced the District Attorney and the Court to reduce the charges against his client to simple Assault & Battery upon a sentence of straight probation.
Result: Defendant pleads to lesser offense of misdemeanor Assault and Battery and avoids possible jail time.
April 14, 2009
Brighten District Court
Clerk’s Hearing
Improper Equipment
The defendant received a citation after allegedly operating his motor with improper equipment that being a defective headlight. Today after a Clerk’s hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find the defendant not responsible after presenting evidence that the headlight was fixed.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed
April 7, 2009
Peabody District Court
Application for Criminal Complaint
Utter False Prescription M.G.L. c. 94C, § 33 E
The defendant, a professional person, was accused of altering a written prescription for a prescription medication she was prescribed by her doctor. After refusing to answer questions from police, the client received an Application for Criminal Complaint from the Court, and thereafter hired Attorney Topazio to defend her. Attorney Topazio contacted the prosecuting officer and presented his client's version of facts in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the case. After securing a continuance of the Magistrate's hearing, Attorney Topazio obtained his client's medical records to substantiate his client's course of treatment and prescription medications for the hearing. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate, with the consent of the police prosecutor, to hold the case open for one year, with the agreement to dismiss the case if his client encounters no further trouble during that time.
Result: Criminal charges do not issue against his client and she will not receive a criminal record provided she stays out of trouble during the proceeding year.
March 31, 2009
Dedham District Court
Appeal from Magistrate's Hearing
Speeding M.G.L. c.90 § 17
The defendant was cited by State Police when observed driving 85 in a posted 65 MPH zone. This citation was the defendant's third speeding violation within a one year period which would have caused his right to operate a motor vehicle within the Commonwealth to be suspended for 30 days. At the initial Magistrate's Hearing the defendant represented himself and was unsuccessful and appealed the Magistrate's finding to a Judge Hearing. The defendant, a doctor of internal medicine, fearing a license suspension, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio was successful in obtaining a finding of NOT responsible for his client.
Result: Case dismissed and Defendant avoids a potential suspension of his driving privileges.
March 31, 2009
Framingham District Court
0949 CR 0105
Assault & Battery M.G.L. c. 265 § 13A
The defendant while dropping off her children to their father was arrested for Domestic Assault and Battery after allegedly striking him in the head and then allegedly being struck in the head by the father while in his automobile. When the police arrived, the parties were separated and interviewed individually. The police arrested both the defendant and the father after concluding that a verbal argument escalated to the point where the defendant hit the father leaving a visible mark on his neck when the father then struck the defendant in the head twice. The defendant hired Attorney to represent her in this case. After investigating the facts of the case, Attorney Topazio argued that his client had acted in self-defense after the complainant jerked the automobile causing his client to lose her balance and fall backwards grabbing at him for balance when she scratched him in the neck area. Today, at a pre-trial conference, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the Court to dismiss the charges against his client after each party entered into an Accord & Satisfaction.
Result: Case dismissed.
March 6, 2009
Lowell District Court
0311 CR 2671
Assault and Battery M.G.L. c. 94, § 33 (b)
The defendant, who received a term of pre-trial probation for the charge of Assault and Battery, moved to Florida after her probation had ended, hired Attorney Topazio to seal her record. Attorney Topazio filed a Motion to Seal and further notified the court, district attorney and commissioner of probation that due to financial constraints, his client could appear at the hearing date and was requesting that her presence be waived when the Motion to Seal was argued in court. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to seal his client's record in her absence. His client can now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that she has no record despite being arrested, charged and placed on probation for this crime.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
March 5, 2009
Boston Municipal Court
0901 CR 0930
Operating after Suspension M.G.L. c.90, § 23
Unsafe Operation M.G.L. c.90 § 13
The defendant was arrested by State Police when observed driving around a rotary 5-7 times while on a cell phone at a high rate of speed, without stopping or using caution in a dangerous manner. A check with the Registry of Motor Vehicles indicated the defendant's license was suspended. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio reviewed his client's driving record and learned that any further violation would result in a further suspension of his client's license. Attorney Topazio presented to the District Attorney that the reason for his client's license being suspended was as the result of failing to pay a reinstatement fee which was now paid and the reason for driving around a rotary several times was because his client was lost and he was calling for directions. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney and the Court to dismiss the criminal charge and to find his client not responsible on the civil violation.
Result: Case dismissed and Defendant avoids a potential suspension of his driving privileges.
March 4, 2009
Wrentham District Court
0857 CR 3312
Threat to Commit Crime M.G.L. c. 275 § 2
Criminal Harassment M.G.L. c. 265 § 43A(a)
The defendant, a High School Senior, was suspended for fighting with a fellow classmate, then criminally charged for allegedly harassing and threatening that classmate and another while at a school sponsored sporting event. As a condition of release, the client was ordered to have no contact with the alleged victims, a difficult task since all parties attended the same High School. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted school officials to see if they would be willing to mediate the situation if the parties consented. After speaking with Director of Student Affairs and then meeting with the Principal of the High School, Attorney Topazio filed a motion with the court amending his client's conditions of release to allow supervised contact with the complainants only in a structured setting of the High School and in the presence of each party's parents and High School Officials. Attorney Topazio arranged for his client and his client's parents along with the complainants and their parents to engage in a voluntary mediation with the Principal and Director of Student Affairs from the High School. Mediation was a success as all parties were in agreement in resolving the situation. Today, Attorney Topazio with the consent of the District Attorney continued his client's case to a date after his client's scheduled graduation this year with an agreement that all charges would be dismissed provided no further problems between the parties occur by that time.
Result: Mediation a success and all charges to be dismissed after client graduates High School this year.
February 20, 2009
Malden District Court
Probation Surrender
0950CR0025
0650CR3512
0650CR2268
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon M.G.L. c. 265 § 15B
The defendant who is on probation hired Attorney Steven J. Topazio when he was arrested for assaulting another individual with a chair while at the Cyber Café in Malden, thereby violating his probation where the defendant is facing two and one-half years in jail. Additionally, if convicted of Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, the defendant faces imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or imprisonment in jail for not more than two and one-half years. Attorney Topazio immediately met with the defendant's probation officer and persuaded her not to revoke his client's bail. Attorney Topazio next met with the District Attorney and the complaining witness in an attempt to negotiate a compromise. Today, after conferencing the case with the District Attorney and with his client's probation officer, he was successful in continuing the final surrender with an agreement that upon an admission to sufficient facts, his client would not be surrendered and would face no jail time, provided he stays away from the Cyber Café and apologizes to the complainant.
Result: Defendant not incarcerated and avoids probation surrender. Case pending disposition.
February 17, 2009
Waltham District Court
Clerk's Hearing
Impeding Operation M.G.L. c. 90 § 113
The defendant received a citation after allegedly leaving his motor vehicle running and illegally parked at the entrance of a shopping mall parking lot, when he went into one of the stores. Today after a Clerk's hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find the defendant not responsible.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
January 16, 2009
Somerville District Court
0810 CR 1960
Possession with Intent to Distribute Class B c. 94C § 32A
Conspiracy c. 94 § 40
The defendant, who was on probation, was contacted by a police informant who arranged to buy drugs from him. The defendant was arrested during the alleged drug transaction. The defendant was found to be in possession of three (3) plastic bags of cocaine. After the arrest the defendant made several incriminatory statements. The defendant's probation was revoked on account of the new arrest and he was committed for one year to the House of Correction, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio moved to suppress the drugs found on the defendant. Cognizant of the fact that his client was serving a sentence, Attorney Topazio, over the Commonwealth's, objection, but prior to the suppression hearing, offered a change of plea in which he obtained a concurrent sentence for his client with no additional time. The sentence additionally was imposed Nuno Pro Tune to the original date of his client's incarceration when he was committed on the violation of probation. Nuno Pro Tune is a Latin phrase, meaning "now for then". The effect of this procedure caused the defendant's sentence to be imposed retroactively.
Result: Defendant receives no additional jail time upon resolving his case and receives a sentence to be served concurrent with the sentence he was presently serving.
January 14, 2009
Chelsea District Court
0814 CR 3193
Utter a False Prescription M.G.L. c. 94, § 33 (b)
The defendant, who had lost his health insurance and could not afford to pay for his prescription medications, presented a forged prescription under his friend's name (who had health insurance) for medication the defendant had a valid prescription for, was arrested and hired Attorney Topazio to defend him. The defendant who held a real estate license could not afford a conviction as it would cause a suspension of his license. Today, Attorney Topazio was successful in convinced a Judge to continue his client's case without a finding for nine months. A CWOF is not a conviction under State law.
Result: Defendant avoids jail and conviction, and his case will be dismissed after nine months.
January 9, 2009
Lynn District Court
0813 CR 2892
OUI 2nd Offense M.G.L. c.90, § 24
Unlicensed Operation M.G.L. c.90 § 10
The defendant was observed by a civilian operator who called the police about the defendant's erratic operation. The defendant, who was stopped at 2:20 a.m., produced a driver's license which had a 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. driving restriction. The officer had the defendant perform various field sobriety tests, all of which he failed and he was arrested for OUI and unlicensed operation. At the station, the defendant was advised of his right to submit to a chemical test, but was unable to complete the test satisfactorily. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. The defendant, who couldn't recall much of events surrounding his arrest as a result of blacking out from alcohol consumption, requested that Attorney Topazio negotiate a favorable plea. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the Court to dismiss the unlicensed operation charge and to sentence the defendant to an alcohol education program, thus avoiding the 60 day mandatory jail sentence that would follow a conviction for a conviction for a second offense OUI.
Result: Defendant avoids mandatory jail time.
December 23, 2008
Suffolk Superior Court
9311831001-4
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
The defendant a Registered Nurse hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of four counts, two for Larceny over $250.00 and two for Receiving Stolen Property over $250.00, all of which were felonies. The defendant who could only find employment as an agency nurse was pursuing further employment as a permanent full time employee in a Hospital in Springfield, MA. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite being arrested, charged and placed on probation for these crimes.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
December 22, 2008
Wrentham District Court
9457CR2499
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of motor vehicle violations and the felony charge of counterfeiting motor vehicle documents. The defendant who admitted to sufficient facts had his charges continued without a finding (CWOF) in 1995. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal his Client's record and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite admitting to sufficient facts and being placed on probation for these crimes.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
December 19, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
894354
894026
Possession with Intent to Distribute Class B ch 94C § 32A
Trial de novo
The defendant was convicted on June 20, 1989 out of the Dorchester District Court docket # 8907CR4991 and received a one year committed sentence under the old trial de novo system. Under the trial de novo system a defendant could try his case before a judge without a jury and if he was not satisfied with the results he could appeal his case to the jury session for a jury trial. The trial de novo system allowed a defendant the right to try his case twice or have two bites at the apple. The defendant exercised his de novo right to appeal to the jury session and entered his appeal in the BMC Jury-of -Six session when he appeared in the BMC. The defendant however thereafter defaulted and never had his jury trial. The Commonwealth moved pursuant to M.G.L. ch. 278 § 24 to vacate the defendant's appeal and to impose the lower court sentence when the defendant appeared in October of 2008 to remove the default. The defendant who was held on bail hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio filed a Motion to Oppose the Commonwealth's Request to Impose Lower Court Sentence. Attorney Topazio argued that since the defendant appeared in the jury session then he entered or perfected his appeal as required by statute and that any default thereafter should be treated as a default in the normal course and not as a solid default requiring the lower court sentence to be imposed. Although the trial de novo system ended in the early 1990s, Attorney Topazio successfully utilized the case of Commonwealth v. Coughlin, 364 N.E.2d 210 (1977) which indicated that decisions to declare a defendant in default on his appeal for trial de novo, or to lift such a default, should normally be left to the discretion of the judge on the scene. Despite the Commonwealth's opposition and demands to impose the lower court sentence, Attorney Topazio persuaded the Court as a compromise to impose the lower court sentence "nunc por tunc" as of June 20, 1989 and deem the defendant's sentence served, effectively ending the case. The term "nunc pro tunc" is Latin meaning "now for then." Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Court not to incarcerate his client but to deem that sentence served, effectively ending the case in his client's favor.
Result: Defendant not incarcerated and case closed.
December 17, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0701JC7987
Possession of a firearm, M.G.L. c. 269 § 10(a)
The defendant was taken into custody on November 4, 2007, by Boston Police for questioning. While the defendant was in police custody, Boston Police searched his home and found a firearm secreted in a dirty white sock inside a barbecue grill located on the first floor back porch. The defendant was arrested for possession of a firearm. Possessing a firearm without a valid license is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two and one-half years nor more than five years, or for not less than 18 months nor more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction. As a result to the search, Attorney Topazio who represented the defendant, moved to suppress all observations made of the defendant, all statements made by him, all evidence of every name, nature and description, whether tangible or intangible, seized from his person or his residence, including but not limited to the firearm, during a warrantless search by members of the Boston Police on November 4, 2007. After a lengthy suppression hearing, the Court denied the defendant's motion to suppress evidence. After the court ruled against the defendant on his motion to suppress, Attorney Topazio marked the case for trial. Today, at trial, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the Court to dismiss the gun charges against his client.
Result: Case dismissed at trial and defendant avoids a mandatory 18 month jail sentence..
November 25, 2008
Brighton District Court
0808CR0921
Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol, M.G.L. c. 90 § 24
The defendant was stopped via LIDAR traveling 70 mph in a posted 35 mph zone. The defendant submitted to various field sobriety tests and thereafter was arrested for OUI. The defendant hired Attorney to represent him in this case. After investigating the facts of the case, Attorney Topazio marked the case for trial. Today, at trial, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the Court to dismiss the charges against his client.
Result: Case dismissed at trial.
November 21, 2008
Newton District Court
0812CR0819
Assault and Battery, M.G.L. c. 265 § 13A
The defendant while at home got into a fight with her husband called the police for assistance. When the police arrived, the husband and wife were separated and interviewed individually. The police arrested the wife after concluding that a verbal argument escalated to the point where the wife bit the husband leaving a visible bite mark. The defendant hired Attorney to represent her in this case. After investigating the facts of the case, Attorney Topazio discovered that the wife had acted in self-defense and bit her husband who had grabbed her and over powered her. Despite calling 911, the defendant was arrested after denying that her husband had assaulted her in an attempt to prevent him from getting arrested. Today, at a pre-trial conference, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the Court to dismiss the charges against his client after informing the court that the husband was asserting both his marital privilege and Fifth Amendment right not to testify against his wife.
Result: Case dismissed.
November 17, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0801CR7652
Probation Surrender
The defendant, visiting Boston, got into a fight while in Fanuiel Hall and was seen by a Boston Police Officer punching and knocking another individual to the ground. The officers radioed EMS to respond to the victim who remained motionless on the ground. The defendant, who ran from police, was apprehended hiding behind a trash barrel, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, at a pre-trial conference, over the objection of the Commonwealth, was successful in getting the Court to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" with unsupervised probation. A "CWOF" instead of a guilty conviction protected the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law. The court additionally waived all fines and costs.
Result: Trial avoided. Defendant protects his criminal record and the CWOF will end as a dismissal provided the defendant gets in no further trouble.
November 3, 2008
Chelsea District Court
0814CR3731
OUI Liquor .08%, M.G.L. c. 90 § 24
Possession with Intent to Distribute class B, M.G.L. c. 94C § 32A
Possession with Intent to Distribute class E, M.G.L. c. 94C § 32A
Drug Violation Near School/Park, M.G.L. c. 94C § 32J
The defendant was arrested after being seen going the wrong way down a one way street. After detecting an odor of alcohol, the defendant was asked and submitted to a series of field sobriety tests. The officer concluded that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and arrested him. At the station the defendant submitted to a breathalyzer and registered a .16. While inventorying his property, 19 bags of a substance alleged to be cocaine were found on his person along with multiple pills and $1644.00 in US Currency. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. At the defendant's arraignment, the Commonwealth moved to hold the defendant of $5000.00 bail. Today, Attorney Topazio successfully secured the defendant's release on $500.00 bail and continued the case for a pre-trial hearing.
Result: Defendant released on reasonable bail. Case pending.
October 28, 2008
Registry of Motor Vehicles
Motor Vehicle Hearing
Suspension /Massachusetts Hold on California license renewal
The defendant was a resident of Massachusetts and moved to California in 1994. When the client was renewing his California license in 2008, he learned that he could not due so due to a hold placed on his license from the state of Massachusetts. The client who tried in vain to obtain the reasons from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor vehicles hired Attorney Topazio to correct the situation. Attorney Topazio learned that while in California the client was arrested for drunk driving and pled nolo contendere to California vehicle code 23152(A) (operating under the influence). Because the client had once been a resident of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles suspended the client's right to operate in California until the requirements of Melanie's Law which became law in Massachusetts in 2005 was complied with. Attorney Topazio obtained an abstract of the California conviction and California violation code and appeared on behalf of the client before the Registry and was successful in lifting the hold.
Result: Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles Hold lifted allowing California driver's license to be renewed.
October 22, 2008
Brookline District Court
(Omitted due to sealing)
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
The defendant a former resident of Massachusetts moved to Austin Texas and was employed as a security guard hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of two counts, one for leaving the scene of property damage and the other for operating after suspension. The defendant was pursuing further employment in law enforcement was returning to school in pursuit of a criminal justice degree. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record based on a compelling state interest and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite being arrested, charged and convicted of a crime.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
October 21, 2008
Malden District Court
Charlestown District Court
0850CR1007
0604CR0830
Probation Surrender
The defendant was on probation out of both the Malden and Charlestown District Courts for past drug offenses where he owed each court one (1) year to the House of Corrections. While on probation, the defendant was involved in an undercover police drug bust and arrested for possession with intent to distribute a class B substance out of the Somerville District Court. The defendant was found to be in violation of probation in both Malden and Charlestown. Although the defendant posted bail on the new case, the defendant's bail was revoked on each probation case and he was held in custody on a probation detainer, hired Attorney Topazio to represent him on all matters. Attorney Topazio instructed the surety on the open case to request a return of her bail so that the defendant would earn good time on the open case. Having bail posted on one case where the defendant is being held on another case would not earn the defendant good time and would be considered dead time on the case where bail is posted. Attorney Topazio next meet with each supervising probation officer and the arresting officer on the open case to negotiate a settlement but was unsuccessful. Not only was probation looking to have the defendant committed, they wanted the sentences to run on and after each other, increasing the defendant's exposure to over two (2) years. Today, after rejecting the plea recommendation, Attorney Topazio convinced the court at a final probation surrender hearing not to sentence the defendant to consecutive jail sentences, but to run his sentences concurrent.
Result: Defendant's sentences run concurrent resulting in an earlier release from custody.
October 14, 2008
Somerville District Court
H849/08
Application for Criminal Complaint
The defendant, an airlines employee, and the ex-boyfriend of the complainant's girlfriend, was charged with threatening to kill the new boyfriend. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him at a hearing before a clerk magistrate. Attorney Topazio first arranged for a meeting with the police prosecutor then engaged in negotiations in an attempt to settle the parties' differences and to keep the peace. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced an assistant clerk magistrate not to issue a criminal complaint against the defendant on the condition that no further contact between the parties occurs over the coming year. The defendant's criminal record remains unblemished and his employment is unaffected.
Result: Application for Criminal Complaint to be dismissed October 14, 2009 provided no contact between the parties.
September 16, 2008
Roxbury District Court
0802CR1412
Malicious Destruction of a Motor Vehicle, M.G.L. c. 266 § 28
Wanton Destruction of property M.G.L. c. 266 § 28
The defendant, an insurance salesman, was charged with malicious destruction of a motor vehicle, a felony charge, which cannot be resolved by way of a continuance without a finding, and further carries a loss of license upon conviction, hired Attorney Topazio. The defendant was arrested after kicking and denting the door of an Enterprise Rental vehicle that was being operated by a valet. The defendant filed a cross complaint against the valet for assault and battery, docket 0802CR2232, after being grabbed and tackled by the valet. Despite this fact, the prosecutor chose to prosecute the defendant only and dismissed the cross complaint against the valet. Attorney Topazio on the day of trial had a lobby conference with the court in a last attempt to resolve the matter short of trial. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the court and the prosecutor to reduce the charge against the defendant to Wanton Destruction of property pursuant to M.G.L. c. 266 § 28, a misdemeanor, and to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" with unsupervised probation. A "CWOF" instead of a guilty conviction protected the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law and further prevented the Registry of Motor Vehicles from suspending the defendant's driver's license which would have occurred upon a conviction for Malicious Destruction of a Motor Vehicle, M.G.L. c. 266 § 28, a felony.
Result: Trial avoided. Defendant protects his criminal record while by being allowed to plead to a misdemeanor instead of a felony charge. Most importantly he saves his job and prevents his driver's license from being suspended.
September 12, 2008
Malden District Court
(Omitted at client's request)
Restraining Order Hearing, M.G.L. c. 209A
The defendant, who was charged with domestic assault and battery against his wife, hired Attorney Topazio. The defendant filed for divorce and attempted to resolve his marital differences with his wife in the Probate and Family Court. Despite this fact, the defendant's wife filed a 209A restraining order against her husband in the district court. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the judge not to issue a restraining order against his client.
Result: Restraining Order denied.
August 27, 2008
Lawrence District Court
0818CR6030
Utter False Prescription ch 94C § 33(b)
Defendant presented a photocopy of an original prescription for a controlled substance, Vyvanse, an amphetamine based controlled substance to Letourmeau's Pharmacy in Andover, MA as well as presenting a second photocopy of the same prescription for Vynanse to Walgreen's Pharmacy in Woburn, MA. When the pharmacies refused to fill a prescription the police were contacted. The Andover Police investigated the matter and issued an arrest warrant for the defendant through the Lawrence District Court for uttering a false prescription. The Client, who was already on bail for the same offense hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio contacted the Andover Police and arranged to have the defendant voluntarily surrender himself to the court, thus avoiding an arrest and the police booking procedure which follows an arrest. When in court, the Commonwealth filed a motion to revoke the defendant's recognizance on his open case pursuant to M.G.L. c. 276 § 58. Although the Commonwealth proved that the Client was given his bail warnings, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to deny the Commonwealth's motion thus preventing the client's bail from being revoked. If the Client's bail were revoked, he would have been held without bail for up to 60 days. The charge of uttering a false prescription was continued for further hearing.
Result: Warrant withdrawn and client released on bail. Case pending
August 25, 2008
Lawrence District Court
0818CR2352
Operating After Suspension ch 90 § 23
Possession Class A ch 94C § 34
The defendant, who was stopped due to outstanding warrants, was arrested on those warrants and for operating after suspension. During an inventory search of the motor vehicle, several plastic syringes with a white residue and dried blood residue were found in the console of the car. Also found were several silver spoons with a white rock powder substance residue as well as a brown residue. The residue tested positive for both heroine and cocaine. The client, whose license was suspended due to court defaults, also was in the second year of the interlock program with the registry of motor vehicles, (which required the interlock or portable breathalyzer to be installed his vehicle). A violation of the interlock contract could result in a 10 year loss of driving privileges. The client hired Attorney Topazio to keep him out of jail and to save his driver's license. Through the assistance of Attorney Topazio, the defendant began dealing with his substance abuse problems, attended treatment daily, and obtained a sobriety sponsor thereby regaining his sobriety before facing the court. Today during a lobby conference with the prosecution and the court, Attorney Topazio pointed out the difficulties in the prosecution's case and convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss the operating after suspension charge. Although the prosecution agreed not to recommend incarceration upon a plea, the prosecution was insistent that the defendant must plead guilty to the possession charge to avoid incarceration due to the defendant's criminal record for drugs. Attorney Topazio rejected the offer to protect the defendant's license and was successful in convincing the court over the prosecutions objections to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" on the drug charge. A "CWOF" instead of a guilty conviction protects the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law and further prevents the Registry of Motor Vehicles from suspending the defendant's driver's license which would have occurred upon any conviction for a drug offense.
Result: Defendant avoids jail and protects his criminal record. Most importantly he prevents his driver's license from being suspended
August 15, 2008
Cambridge District Court
0852CR1287
Utter False Prescription ch 94C § 33(b)
Possession Class C (Clonazepam) ch 94C § 34
Defendant presented an altered prescription for a controlled substance to a CVS Pharmacy in Cambridge, MA. When the defendant was arrested, various pills were found in the defendant's pockets who could not provide a valid prescription for them. The Client hired Attorney Topazio who continued the case for a pre-trial hearing to gather evidence and to try to convince the prosecution to dismiss the charges. Although the prescription that the defendant presented was altered, by establishing that the defendant had a past prescription for the medications found on his person, Attorney Topazio was able to convince the District Attorney and the Court to dismiss the charges of Possession of a Class C substance prior to trial. With regards to the remaining charge, Attorney Topazio presented a defense of criminal responsibility regarding the uttering charge. The remaining charge of uttering a false prescription was continued for further hearing.
Result: Count for illegal possession dismissed. Case pending.
August 14, 2008
Wrentham District Court
Clerk Magistrate's Hearing
Show Cause Hearing
Application for Criminal Complaint
Domestic Assault and Battery ch 265 § 13A
Client, a mother of a young teenage child who suffers from disabilities was summons to court after admitting to striking her child after being confronted by him. The client hired Attorney Topazio to defend her in this matter. Attorney Topazio contacted the prosecuting detective and provided him with a copy of a 51A report completed by the Department of Social Services which indicated that there was no finding of abuse or neglect. At the show cause hearing, Attorney Topazio had the wife's husband attend the hearing so as to provide insight into the home life to the detective and clerk magistrate. Attorney Topazio convinced the clerk magistrate not to issue the complaint against his Client.
Result: Application for Complaint Dismissed.
August 13, 2008
South Boston District Court
Motor Vehicle Citation Hearing
Speeding
The defendant was the operator of a motor vehicle who was given a motor vehicle citation because he was caught speeding on the Mass Pike going 65mph in a posted 45mph zone. The defendant, who had several moving violation tickets pending, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a clerk magistrate not to issue the civil citation against the defendant despite his actions and past driving record.
Result: Not Responsible.
August 12, 2008
Framingham District Court
0749CR4296
Possession Class A ch 94C § 34
Possession Class B ch 94C § 34
Possession Class C ch 94C § 34
Possession Class E ch 94C § 34
The defendant, who was the back seat passenger of a motor vehicle which was stopped for a civil motor vehicle infraction, was arrested and charged with possession of multiple narcotics which were found in a container in the motor vehicle and for drugs found on his person. The arresting officer alleged that he saw a glassine bag in the motor vehicle, consistent with drug packaging, which justified his search. During booking procedures, heroine was found on the defendant. Plea negotiations had gone badly for the defendant who discharged his counsel and hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio moved to suppress all statements regarding ownership of the container allegedly made by the defendant, and all narcotics found arguing same were seized unlawfully. Following an extensive evidentiary hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to suppress all statements made by the defendant regarding possession, custody or control of the container which contained drugs and further convinced the court to suppress the drugs found on the defendant when he was searched at the station. Attorney Topazio argued that the discovery of drugs found of the defendant should be suppressed pursuant to the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine, and the Court agreed. Today during a lobby conference with the prosecution and the court, Attorney Topazio pointed out the difficulties in the prosecution's case as a result of the suppressed evidence. Although the prosecution agreed not to recommend incarceration upon a plea, the prosecution was insistent that the defendant must plead guilty to all counts to avoid incarceration due to the defendant's criminal record for drugs. Attorney Topazio rejected the offer to protect the defendant's job and license and was successful in convincing the court over the prosecutions objections to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" with unsupervised probation on all counts. A "CWOF" instead of a guilty conviction protected the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law and further prevented the Registry of Motor Vehicles from suspending the defendant's driver's license which would have occurred upon any conviction for a drug offense.
Result: Defendant avoids jail and protects his criminal record while at the same time avoids supervised probation. Most importantly he saves his job and prevents his driver's license from being suspended.
August 5, 2008
Roxbury District Court
Motor Vehicle Citation Hearing
Failure to Stop ch 89 § 9
The defendant was the operator of a motor vehicle who was given a motor vehicle citation because he failed to stop at a stop light. The defendant, who had been unsuccessful in the past in arguing his own traffic violation cases, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a clerk magistrate not to issue the civil citation against the defendant despite his actions and past driving record.
Result: Not Responsible.
August 1, 2008
Malden District Court
0550CR2978
0550CR3569
Probation Surrender
The defendant was on probation and had an 18 month suspended sentence on one case and 18 months suspended and straight probation on the remaining counts of a second case with a three year probationary period. As a condition of probation, the defendant was obligated to remain drug free, complete OCC level 3 and to obey all state federal and local laws. Eight months into his probation, the defendant relapsed on drugs, was rearrested on several drug offenses and ceased reporting to probation where a warrant issued for his arrest. After being in default for over one year, the defendant was arrested and faced a final surrender where his probation officer was recommending the imposition of the 18 month committed sentence. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him in his probation surrender. Attorney Topazio continued the final surrender several times so as to allow his client to enter into a detox and to receive treatment. Through the assistance of Attorney Topazio, the defendant began dealing with his substance abuse problems, attended treatment daily, and obtained a sobriety sponsor thereby regaining his sobriety before facing the court. During the final surrender hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to terminate the defendant's lengthy probation upon a committed sentence of nine months, and the court agreed. The defendant stipulated to a violation of his probation and was committed for nine months instead of 18 months.
Result: The defendant regains his sobriety and agrees to a commitment of 9 months instead of 18 months where he will be parole eligible in 4 ½ months and when released from custody will no longer be on probation.
July 2, 2008
Malden District Court
0850CR1007
Carrying a Dangerous Weapon ch 269 § 10(b)
Possession Class B ch 94C § 34
Operating Motor Vehicle with Suspended license ch 90 § 23
Fail to Stop for Police ch 90 § 25
The defendant was arrested when he failed to stop for a State Trooper when ordered to do so. When speaking with the defendant the Trooper detected an odor of burnt marijuana coming from the defendant’s car and thereafter determined that the defendant’s driver’s license was suspended, arrested the defendant. Upon searching the motor vehicle, a machete and cocaine (secreted in the false bottom of a WD-40 can) were found in the trunk of the motor vehicle. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio in preparing this case for trial convinced the prosecutor that the defendant could not be prosecuted for carrying a dangerous weapon because one cannot be found to be under control of a dangerous weapon (machete) found in the trunk of a car. As a result of the efforts of Attorney Topazio, the Commonwealth filed a Nolle Prosequi as to the dangerous weapon count. Through intensive negotiations, Attorney Topazio also persuaded the Commonwealth to dismiss the remaining charges if the defendant pleads to the remaining charge of possession of Class B. The defendant changed his plea and requested that he be placed on probation in lieu of jail, and the Court agreed.
Result: Three of the four counts against the defendant are dismissed, and the defendant avoids jail time by accepting probation for the cocaine secreted in the false bottom of a fake WD-40 can found in his possession.
June 27, 2008
Lynn District Court
0713CR4733
Unlawful presence at a place where heroin is kept or being in company of person in possession thereof ch 94C § 35
The defendant, who was observed in a drug transaction to purchase heroine was chased by police where two bags of heroine were found on the co-defendant. The defendant, who is on probation in a different court and is facing probation surrender hearing, initially represented himself, defaulted at the probation surrender hearing and defaulted at the pre-trial conference stage, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio continued the probation case and had the defendant enter a 30 day detox at Spectrum Health Systems, and continued the open case for pre-trial hearing. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the Commonwealth to drop the charge against the defendant in consideration of his rehabilitation, which the Court accepted.
Result: Case dismissed
June 24, 2008
Framingham District Court
0749CR4296
Possession Class A ch 94C § 34
Possession Class B ch 94C § 34
Possession Class C ch 94C § 34
Possession Class E ch 94C § 34
The defendant, who was the back seat passenger of a motor vehicle which was stopped for a civil motor vehicle infraction, was arrested and charged with possession of multiple narcotics which were found in a container in the motor vehicle and for drugs found on his person. The arresting officer alleged that he saw a glassine bag in the motor vehicle, consistent with drug packaging, which justified his search. During booking procedures, heroine was found on the defendant. Plea negotiations had gone badly for the defendant who discharged his counsel and hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio moved to suppress all statements regarding ownership of the container allegedly made by the defendant, and all narcotics found arguing same were seized unlawfully. Following an extensive evidentiary hearing, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to suppress all statements made by the defendant regarding possession, custody or control of the container which contained drugs and further convinced the court to suppress the drugs found on the defendant when he was searched at the station. Attorney Topazio argued that the discovery of drugs found of the defendant should be suppressed pursuant to the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine, and the Court agreed.
Result: Inculpatory statements linking defendant to the container and the drugs found on his person were suppressed. Case pending.
June 20, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0801CR3430
Malicious Destruction of Property over $250 ch 266 § 12
Resting Arrest ch 268 § 32B
The defendant was arrested for damaging a scooter parked on the side of the road and then resisting arrest. The defendant who was chased by police refused to submit to their lawful commands and when he attempted to strike the officers when he became combative was thereafter sprayed in the face with oleoresin capsicum (mace). Attorney Topazio met with prosecutors in an attempt to resolve the charges short of trial and requested that the case be submitted to mediation. The defendant committed these acts while on probation for an OUI offense from a different court and thus needed to avoid a conviction so as to prevent his probation from being violated. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the Court and the Commonwealth to place the defendant on pre-trial probation pursuant to ch 276 § 87 on the condition that he pay restitution for the damage caused to the scooter, attend AA/NA and submit to random drug testing.
Result: Defendant avoids a conviction provided he successfully completes the terms of his pre-trial probation which will result in his case ultimately being dismissed. Defendant also avoids being violated by probation as he did not have to admit to any charges when placed on pre-trial probation.
May 12, 2008
South Boston District Court
0803AC143
Failure to Stop for Police ch 90 § 25
Negligent Operation ch 90 § 24
Leaving the Scene of Property Damage ch 90 § 24(2)(a)
Marked Lanes Violation ch 89 § 4A
Failure to keep Right ch 89 § 24
Speeding ch 90 § 17
The defendant was accused of speeding through a construction site, running over orange cones, failing to stop for a police officer when signaled then crashing his car into a light pole and fleeing the scene on foot. The defendant filed a stolen motor vehicle report but received a motor vehicle citation via the mail and thereafter represented himself at a clerk’s hearing but was unsuccessful. The officer who initially only brought civil motor vehicle charges against the defendant thereafter brought criminal charges against the defendant after the clerk’s hearing and issued a second set of motor vehicle citations some five months after the initial incident. The defendant represented himself again at a subsequent clerk’s hearing and lost again. The defendant, who is in the United States Marine Corps, received his involuntary deployment papers during this hearing process and could not afford a conviction or had the time to fight this case in court, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio advanced the case and filed a pretrial motion to dismiss the complaint. The grounds for dismissal was based on the fact that the police had failed to make a timely delivery of the citation pursuant to G.L. c. 90C, §2, the “No-Fix Statute”. Compliance with G.L. c. 90C, §2, requires a copy of the citation of a motor vehicle offense to be delivered to the accused at the time and place of the violation or within a reasonable time thereafter. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the Court that a delay of five months was unreasonable and violated the no-fix statute. All charges against the defendant were dismissed.
Result: Case dismissed, Defendant protects his criminal record, and does not violate his deployment orders from the US Marine Corps and is deployed on schedule.
May 9, 2008
New Bedford Superior Court
0834CR1573
OUI-Liquor or .08 (Fifth Offense) ch 90 § 24
Negligent Operation ch 90 § 24(2)(a)
Leaving the Scene of Property Damage ch 90 § 24(2)(a)
Marked Lanes Violation ch 89 § 4A
The defendant was accused of drunk driving after he crashed his motor vehicle into a tree near his home and then left the scene. The defendant was thereafter stopped and arrested and admitted to getting into the accident and leaving the scene. The defendant submitted to field sobriety tests and took a breathalyzer exam where the result was .14. At the Attleboro District Court where the defendant was arraigned, he was charged with a fifth offense OUI, where he is facing a mandatory two and one half year jail up to five year state prison sentence if convicted, was held without bail pending a dangerous hearing. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him in this case. Attorney Topazio appealed the defendant's bail to Superior Court after he was held without bail after being found a danger to the community. Attorney Topazio established by clear and convincing evidence after a hearing that there were conditions of release that would reasonably assure the safety of the community and a Justice of the Superior Court released the defendant on those conditions which included among other things a GPS tracking devise and alcohol monitoring. This case is presently pending in the Attleboro District Court.
Result: Defendant released from custody pending trial.
May 6, 2008
Chelsea District Court
Application for Criminal Complaint
Possession of Class D ch 94C § 34
The defendant was in a motor vehicle with four other individuals smoking marijuana late at night when the motor vehicle was stopped by State Police for a motor vehicle violation. The State Trooper smelled marijuana when questioning the operator and after being questioned, the trooper recovered a half smoked joint from the defendant. Instead of arresting the defendant the trooper summonsed him to court to face a clerk's hearing on an application for criminal complaint for possession of marijuana. Instead of representing himself, the defendant who had a previous record for possession of marijuana, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a clerk magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint against the defendant despite the strength of the Commonwealth's case and the defendant's prior record.
Result: Application for Criminal Complaint dismissed.
May 5, 2008
Dorchester District Court
Motor Vehicle Citation Hearing
Impeded Operation ch 90 § 13
Yield to Pedestrian ch 89 § 11
The defendant was the operator of a motor vehicle who was given a motor vehicle citation because she failed to yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk due to talking on her cell phone. The defendant, who had been unsuccessful in the past in arguing her own traffic violation cases, hired Attorney Topazio. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a clerk magistrate not to issue the civil citations against the defendant despite her actions and past driving record.
Result: Not Responsible.
May 2, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
(Omitted due to expungement)
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
The defendant a professional individual hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of a conviction to possess with intent to distribute a class B substance. The defendant was pursuing further employment in his area of expertise which he had been prevented from doing due to his criminal record. Attorney Topazio petitioned the court to expunge the defendant's criminal record. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record based on a compelling state interest and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite being arrested, charged and convicted of a crime.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
April 23, 2008
Charlestown District Court
0804CR0007
Operating after Suspension ch 90 § 23
Operating with Suspended Registration ch 90 § 23
Possession of Class D ch 94C § 34
The defendant who had been stopped by police due to a revoked registration was arrested for possession of Marijuana which was found on his person and in the vehicle. The defendant's criminal record reflected multiple committed jail sentences for possession of marijuana and other drug related offenses. The defendant discharged his prior counsel who recommended jail time on a change of plea, and hired Attorney Topazio to keep him out of jail. Attorney Topazio directed the defendant to attend AA or NA and to get into an outpatient counseling program to deal with his drug program. Attorney Topazio also had the defendant repair his license problems and pay all fines prior to court. Attorney Topazio made sure that the defendant had a period of sobriety and would pass a urine screen test if requested by the court. By accentuating all the positive steps the defendant was taking to address his drug problem, Attorney Topazio was able to fashion a plea sentence and convince the court that the defendant would be better served by remaining in the programs which were addressing his substance problem instead of taking him out of those programs and incarcerating him. The court agreed and placed the defendant on a suspended sentence instead of incarcerating him after a change of plea.
Result: Defendant avoids jail time.
April 18, 2008
Somerville District Court
0710CR2705
Marked Lanes Violation ch 89 § 4A
OUI-Drugs ch 90 § 24(1)(a)(1)
Fail to Stop & Yield ch 89 § 9
The defendant who allegedly ran a red light in the city of Somerville was stopped by a Somerville police officer in the town of Arlington. The defendant was ordered out of his motor vehicle at gun point and asked to recite the alphabet which the officer reported that he successfully completed. The officer described the defendant as being confused, having blood shot and glassy eyes, and having exaggerated mood swings. Upon inquiry, the defendant admitted to being on prescription medications. The defendant was arrested for OUI prescription medications and submitted to a breathalyzer where the result was 0.00. Attorney Topazio filed motions to inspect physical evidence and to suppress evidence in the case. The case was continued for a suppression hearing in which Attorney Topazio challenged the probable cause for the stop arguing that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest the defendant and also exceeded his official authority to make a warrantless arrest outside his territorial jurisdiction of his appointment. During the suppression hearing, the arresting officer testified that the defendant successfully completed a second set of field sobriety tests that the officer administered to the defendant at the station which were video taped. Attorney Topazio argued that the suppression hearing essentially elicited all the evidence that would be presented if this case went to trial and agreed with the Court to convert the suppression hearing into a jury waived trial. Attorney Topazio was successful in persuading the Court to enter a required finding of not guilty on behalf of the defendant ending the case.
Result: Not guilt.
April 14, 2008
Marlborough District Court
0721CR0845
OUI-Liquor or .08 (Fourth Offense) ch 90 § 24
Leaving the Scene of Property Damage ch 90 § 24
Speeding ch 90 § 17
The defendant who had been drinking at a local establishment was involved in a one car accident and then left the scene. The defendant was thereafter stopped and arrested and admitted to having two drinks; getting into the accident and leaving the scene of the accident due to being nervous. The defendant submitted to field sobriety tests and took a breathalyzer exam where the result was .12. The defendant, was charged with a fourth offense OUI, and was facing a mandatory two year jail sentence if convicted, discharged his previous counsel and hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio researched the defendant's record of prior convictions and discovered that two of the previous OUI convictions were resolved at the same time and argued that those two convictions should be treated as one for purposes of the subsequent offenses. Attorney Topazio also presented a defense to the Commonwealth illustrating that the breath test result of .12 was inconsistent with the actual known quantity of alcohol consumed by the defendant and could be explained as the result of a side effect from prescription medication the defendant was taking. Attorney Topazio showed that the side effect of the medication (lactic acidosis) can result in a false positive test to ethanol. Through intensive pre-trial negotiations, attacking the prior convictions and developing a trial strategy, Attorney Topazio was able to persuade the prosecutor to reduce the fourth offense OUI charge to a second offense OUI charge upon a change of plea conditioned upon a two week inpatient hospitalization in lieu of jail time.
Result: Defendant avoids mandatory two year jail sentence upon a plea to reduced charges which required a two week inpatient hospitalization.
April 7, 2008
Brighten District Court
0708CR1982
Marked Lanes Violation ch 89 § 4A
OUI-Liquor or .08 ch 90 § 24
Speeding ch 90 § 17
Negligent Operation of MV ch 90 § 24(2)(a)
The defendant who had been drinking with friends was stopped by State Police due to a marked lanes violation and speeding on Storrow Drive. The defendant was subsequently arrested and issued a citation which did not allege a marked lanes violation despite this fact as being the police officer's basis for the motor vehicle stop. The client, who allegedly failed field sobriety tests according to the officer, also refused to submit to a breath test at the station which resulted in his license being suspended for 180 days. Attorney Topazio filed motions to inspect physical evidence and to suppress evidence in the case. The case was continued for a suppression hearing challenging the probable cause for the stop. Prior to the hearing, but after intensive investigation, Attorney Topazio met with the prosecuting attorney and pointed out that the copy of the criminal citation filed with the court had been altered and included violations that were not on the original citation given to the defendant when arrested. Attorney Topazio convinced the prosecutor that the police engaged in misconduct and his reputation impugned if he testified to altering the documents. At the suppression hearing, the prosecutor filed a Nolle Prosequi which caused the entire case against the defendant to be dismissed. Following the dismissal, Attorney Topazio filed a motion to reinstate the client's driver's license which was allowed by the court.
Result: Case dismissed and driving privileges restored.
March 28, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0801CR0757
Assault & Battery ch 265 § 13A
Resisting Arrest ch 268 § 32B
A&B on Public Employee ch 265 § 13D
Possession Class B (Cocaine) ch 94C § 34
The defendant while at a downtown nightclub in Boston was involved in an altercation where a patron was injured. In the process of being removed from the club by bar staff, the defendant resisted being placed under arrest by a detail police officer who was bitten by the defendant on the hand. During the booking process, the defendant was found to be in possession of cocaine. The defendant is a member of IBEW Union Local 104 who possesses a CDL Class B driver's license as a condition of his employment. Fearing incarceration and the loss of his license and employment, the defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Prior to the scheduled pre-trial conference, Attorney Topazio met with the injured police officer and prosecution to negotiate a favorable plea bargain. Although the prosecution agreed not to recommend incarceration upon a plea, the prosecution was insistent that the defendant must plead guilty to all counts to avoid incarceration. Attorney Topazio rejected the offer to protect the defendant's job and license and prepared the case for trial. Through intensive pre-trial preparation, Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the court over the prosecutions objections to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" with unsupervised probation on all counts if the defendant executed an alternative sentence form which would automatically impose guilty findings on all counts should the defendant fail to obey any local, state and federal criminal laws and court orders while on unsupervised probation. A "CWOF" instead of a guilty conviction protected the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law and further prevented the Registry of Motor Vehicles from suspending the defendant's driver's license which would have occurred upon any conviction for a drug offense.
Result: Defendant avoids jail and protects his criminal record while at the same time avoids supervised probation. Most importantly he saves his job and union membership and prevents his CDL driver's license from being suspended.
March 19, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR7470
0601CR6968
Possession with Intent to Distribute (Crack Cocaine) ch 94C § 32A
School Zone ch 94C § 32J
Conspiracy ch 94C § 40
The defendant while in downtown Boston was approached by two undercover police officers and asked where they could buy drugs. The defendant didn't know but agreed to assist the undercover police officers find someone to buy drugs from. When a seller was located the defendant was charged as a joint venturer with the Seller and held on bail and his bail on a case he was on probation for was revoked. The defendant who had been representing himself pro-se was languishing in custody until Attorney Topazio got involved. Attorney Topazio filed a Motion to Dismiss the charges on the theory that the defendant could not be found guilty on a joint venture theory in the sale of drugs since he was assisting undercover police only to buy drugs and merely present when the crime occurred. Although the motion was continued to a future date to give the Commonwealth time to prepare for oral argument, Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Court to release his client from custody on personal recognizance. Case pending.
Result: Defendant released on personal recognizance.
March 10, 2008
Somerville District Court
0810CR0188
OUI-Liquor or .08 ch 90 § 24
The defendant who had been drinking with a friend became intoxicated and got lost on his way home. He was observed by a private citizen operating erratically and caused the private citizen to strike a snow bank damaging her car. The private citizen called police on her cell phone and reported the incident. The private citizen thereafter followed the defendant through multiple towns keeping the police apprised of the defendant's erratic operation and location until they arrived. The defendant submitted to field sobriety tests and did not do so well but refused the breathalyzer. The breathalyzer refusal resulted in a six (6) month suspension of his driver's license. Unfortunately, due to the defendant's lack of sobriety he could not recall the circumstances of his arrest or assist in his defense. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him in this matter and to get his license back as soon as possible. Attorney Topazio requested that the Commonwealth produce the turret tapes of the private citizen cell phone transmissions and the booking video of the defendant and continued the case for a pre-trial conference. At the pre-trial conference, Attorney Topazio was able to convince a Judge not to find the defendant guilty but to impose a continuance without a finding "CWOF" upon an admission to sufficient facts on the condition that he enter into an alcohol education program and to receive a hardship driver's license.
Result: Defendant was allowed to admit to sufficient facts to a misdemeanor charge, avoid a criminal conviction and receive a hardship license upon entering an alcohol education program despite the six (6) month license suspension for refusing to take a breathalyzer.
March 4, 2008
Peabody District Court
0886CR0477
Trafficking in Heroin/Morphine/Opium over 80mg ch 94C § 32E(c)
Conspiracy ch 94C § 40
Drug violation near school/park ch 94C § 32J
The defendant was charged with trafficking in opium (oxycontin) with a net weight of over 80mg. The defendant was present with a co-defendant who was the target of a controlled drug buy when defendant was questioned by police. Without requesting counsel, the client answered police questions and admitted that he was the source of the oxycontins and made several other incriminating statements leading to his arrested. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio after posting bail. Today Attorney Topazio represented defendant at arraignment and secured his release despite the prosecutor's request to hold the defendant on increased bail due to the mandatory time faced by the defendant and his involvement in this and past drug transactions. Case pending.
Result: Defendant released on personal recognizance.
February 11, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR4655
Larceny Over $250 ch 266 § 30
Utter False Instrument ch 267 § 5
The defendant was charged with presenting a forged check to TD Banknorth, NA for payment which paid same. The check was later found to be stolen and forged. The defendant, the named payee on the check, argued that he did not know that the check was stolen let alone forged but thought he received the check from the maker in exchange for services rendered. Attorney Topazio pushed the case to trial. At trial in the Boston Municipal Court, the Commonwealth did not produce the maker of the check but argued that the signature on the check did not match the signature on the bank's signature card and therefore argued that the check was fraudulent. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the court that one cannot speculate as to whether the maker did not authorize the signature on the check or sign the check himself without evidence to the contrary. As a result of the Commonwealth not being able to establish that the defendant acted intentionally, or that the check was fraudulent, the defendant was found not guilty on both counts.
Result: Not Guilty after trial on all counts.
February 8, 2008
Chelsea District Court
0714CR4223
Utter False Prescription ch 94C § 33(b)
Defendant presented an altered prescription for Oxycodone and Zolpidem to a CVS Pharmacy in Revere, MA. Attorney Topazio continued the case for a pre-trial hearing to gather evidence and to try to convince the prosecution to dismiss the charges. By establishing that the defendant had a past prescription for the medications Attorney Topazio was able to convince the court that although the prescription was altered, the defendant in fact had a valid prescription for Oxycodone and Zolpidem and was able to convince the Commonwealth to dismiss the charges prior to trial. The Court agreed.
Result: Case Dismissed.
Brighton District Court
February 7, 2008
0708CR1858
Trafficking in Cocaine over 28 grams ch 94C § 32E(b)
The defendant was charged with trafficking in cocaine with a net weight over 28 grams in a School Zone and faced a minimum mandatory sentence of five (5) years to state prison for the trafficking charge followed by a mandatory two (2) years from and after sentence for a school zone violation. The drugs in this case were obtained via a search warrant of the defendant's home. The defendant was also charged with a hand to hand sale to an undercover officer and charged with this offense. The facts of the hand to hand sale were used to support the issuance of the search warrant. Attorney Topazio challenged the basis for the issuance of the warrant and was successful pre-indictment. Through counsel's efforts, the Commonwealth agreed not to indict the defendant and dismissed the Trafficking in Cocaine charge. Upon an acceptance of responsibility and agreement to plea to one count and receive a two year house of corrections sentence, the Commonwealth further dismissed a distribution of cocaine and school zone charges upon a tender to the lesser charge of possession with intent to distribute, which the defendant accepted thus avoiding mandatory state prison jail time.
Result: Client avoids indictment, has five of six charges against him dismissed, avoids state-prison and the minimum-mandatory three-year sentence, and two-year on and after sentence; and will be released from the house of correction in February 2009.
January 29, 2008
Edgartown District Court
0735CR0526
Domestic Assault and Battery ch 265 § 13A
Accord and Satisfaction ch 276 § 55
The defendant was charged with assault and battery on his girlfriend while at a drinking establishment in the Town of Oak Bluffs. Police witnessed the defendant strike his girlfriend. The girlfriend was interviewed by police and also confirmed police observations. The defendant unsuccessfully tried to get the charges against him dropped and the Commonwealth pushed the case towards trial. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to try the case. Attorney Topazio continued the case for trial but also had the complaining witness (girlfriend) execute an Accord and Satisfaction giving the Court discretion to dismiss the charges over the prosecutor's objections. The Commonwealth argued that the Assault & Battery occurred in the context of domestic violence and that the defendant may have intimidated the girlfriend into signing the accord and satisfaction. The court, after a hearing on the motion, took the defendant's motion under advisement and notified Attorney Topazio prior to the scheduled trial dated that the motion was allowed. Attorney Topazio was able to use an underutilized statute to allow for private agreements to end a criminal prosecution.
Result: Case dismissed
January 25, 2008
Chelsea District Court
0814CR0011
Possession Class B ch 94C § 34
Fugitive From Justice on Court Warrant ch 276 § 20A
The defendant was a passenger in a motor vehicle which was stopped by state police when the police observed a rejected inspection sticker. The defendant was the front seat passenger who was observed to be in violation of the seat belt law. A check of the defendant revealed an NCIC warrant out of New York and the defendant was arrested. The defendant also had a warrant out of the Chelsea District Court. During an inventory search of the motor vehicle, cocaine was discovered and the defendant was additionally charged with possession. At arraignment, the defendant, who also had been on probation, had his bail revoked and held without bail. Attorney Topazio successfully negotiated with the probation officer not to violate the defendant and commit him to the House of Correction but to release him to answer to New York authorities. The Court agreed.
Result: Defendant released to New York authorities and avoided significant committed jail time in Massachusetts.
Chelsea District Court
Possession with Intent to Distribute (Marijuana) ch 94C § 32A
School Zone ch 94C § 32J
The defendant who was stopped for an alleged motor vehicle violation was found to be in possession of a large sum of United States currency and over 18 pounds of marijuana which was discovered in the trunk of the motor vehicle. The defendant hires Attorney Topazio who gets him released on bail. The defendant was initially charged with possession with intent to distribute in a school zone and faced mandatory jail time. Through intense investigation and preparation for a motion to suppress challenging the motor vehicle stop, Attorney Topazio was successful in discovering evidence that the motor vehicle stop may have been pretextual or contrived thus allowing Attorney Topazio to persuade the Commonwealth not to indict the defendant. Attorney Topazio was thereafter further successful in persuading the prosecutor on a change of plea to drop the School Zone charge and getting him to agree to give the defendant a continuance without a finding "CWOF" on a plea to the remaining charge instead of a guilty finding. A CWOF instead of a guilty conviction protected the defendant's criminal record as it is not a conviction under state law and further prevented the Registry of Motor Vehicles from suspending the defendant's driver's license which would have occurred upon any conviction for a drug offense.
Result: School zone charge dismissed and defendant avoids mandatory jail time and further protects his criminal record and saves his driver's license.
January 11, 2008
Chelsea District Court
0714CR3489
Abuse Prevention Order Violation, ch. 209A § 7
Wife who had a restraining order against her husband approached him in public and demanded money from him. Instead of leaving to avoid a violation of the restraining order, the husband, who tried to calm his wife down went to an ATM with her, got money and gave it to her. These events were witnessed by police who knew the wife had an outstanding restraining order against the husband and as a result the husband was arrested. At trial in the Chelsea District Court, Attorney Topazio was able to successfully convince the Court and district attorney not to proceed with the case but to place the defendant on pretrial probation despite the strength of the Commonwealth's case.
Result: Case Dismissed after period of pretrial probation.
January 10, 2008
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR6718
Assault and Battery ch 265 § 13A
Trespass ch 266 § 123
Defendant, the ex-girlfriend of the co-defendant, was charged with assault and battery when she came upon her ex-boyfriend engaged in sexual intercourse with another woman and then engaged that woman in a physical altercation. The boyfriend was charged with forcible Rape, and the defendant charged with Assault and Battery and trespass. The Commonwealth was considering indicting the defendant as a joint venturer in the Rape case. Attorney Topazio, through intensive investigation, established that there was insufficient evidence to charge the defendant as a joint venturer in the Rape case and pressed the Court to hold a probable cause hearing. Attorney Topazio was successful in preventing rape charges from issuing against the defendant and further persuaded the Commonwealth to file a Nolle Prosequi with the court on the Assault and Battery and Trespass charges, thus ending the case.
Result: Case Dismissed and defendant avoids Superior Court indictment.
December 19, 2007
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR4708
Threat to Commit a Crime (via Internet) ch 275 § 2
The defendant was accused of using the internet to send a threatening email to his wife's employer. Client decided to represent himself at a clerk's hearing and things did not go well for him. In the aftermath of the hearing, Client hired Attorney Topazio. At the arraignment, Attorney Topazio successfully established that the Commonwealth could not link the defendant to the I.P. address identified where the threat came from and convinced the Court not to arraign the defendant, but continued the case for arraignment so as to give him time to clear his name. After several court appearances, Attorney Topazio presented an alibi defense for the defendant and convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss the charge against the defendant prior to arraignment. The Court accepted the Commonwealth's request for dismissal prior to arraignment.
Result: Case dismissed prior to arraignment thus preserving the defendant's board of probation record as this charge would have appeared on his criminal offender record information (CORI) if the case were dismissed after arraignment.
December 17, 2007
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR6713
False Application for MV License & procuring Forged RMV document ch 90 § 24B
Defendant who provided a false name to the Registry of Motor Vehicles and obtained a fraudulent drivers license, was arrested when his true identity was discovered. Attorney Topazio continued the case for a pre-trial hearing to try and persuade the Commonwealth to resolve the case short of trial. Through extensive pretrial efforts in assisting the defendant to pay restitution and court costs, and assisting defendant in obtaining a true driver's license, Attorney Topazio was able to successfully convince the prosecutor to drop all charges against the defendant. The Court granted the Commonwealth's request to dismiss all charges.
Result: Case Dismissed.
December 17, 2007
Boston Municipal Court (Jury Appeal)
South Boston District Court
0703CR0717
Intimidation of a Witness ch 268 § 13B
Threats to commit a crime ch 275 § 2
The defendant was arrested for the charges of intimidation of a witness and threats to commit a crime in the South Boston District Court. It was alleged that the defendant was overheard by a court officer stating that a third party probation officer was going to get hit. Prior counsel for the defendant tried to get the defendant to accept a negotiated plea bargain and probation to avoid jail time which the defendant refused. The defendant discharged her prior counsel and hired Attorney Topazio to try her case in the jury session of the Boston Municipal Court. As successor counsel for defendant, Attorney Topazio filed a Memorandum of law and brought a motion to dismiss the charges on the theory that the charges against the defendant were improperly obtained and requested that the case be remanded to the South Boston District Court for a Clerk's Hearing. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Court that the Commonwealth could not establish that the words overheard by a third party eavesdropper were intended to be communicated to the party to establish the crime of threats, who additionally was a witness in a Court proceeding regarding the defendant's son that had already been concluded. As a result, instead of a negotiated plea, the Commonwealth on its own motion moved to dismiss the case.
Result: Case Dismissed.
December 11, 2007
Dorchester District Court
0707CR2810
0707CR2742
False MV Insurance Claim ch 266 § 111B
Attempt to Commit a Crime ch 274 § 6
Conspiracy ch 274 § 7
Defendant was charged with insurance fraud when he was accused of being part of a staged motor vehicle accident in Dorchester, MA. The defendant was accused of crashing his car into that of another individual repeatedly and then claiming that it was an accident. The insurance claim was denied and investigated by the Insurance Fraud unit when Attorney Topazio was hired. At trial, Attorney Topazio used the Commonwealth's own accident reconstruction expert hired by Hanover Insurance Co. to investigate the claim against the Commonwealth be eliciting that the physical damage comparisons of the involved vehicles analyzed by Hanover Insurance Co. was flawed where only one car was examined and only photos of the second car were looked at. As a result of the challenge to the Commonwealth's expert, the Commonwealth offered and the defendant accepted an admission to sufficient facts to a lesser charge of Attempt to Commit a Crime and received a disposition of continuance without a finding with an unsupervised probation.
Result: Felony complaints against the defendant were dismissed and defendant was allowed to admit to sufficient facts to a misdemeanor charge and receive an unsupervised probation.
November 11, 2007
Boston Municipal Court
0701CR4717
Open and Gross Lewdness ch 272 § 16
The defendant a professional individual was charged with open and gross lewdness for conduct while at a urinal in a bathroom at South Station. The conduct observed was described as that other than urination. Open and Gross Lewdness is a sex offender registry crime requiring the individual to register as a sex offender and to be outfitted with a GPS devise for tracking if convicted. The prosecution initially sought a conviction on the case and was unwilling to drop the charges. The Commonwealth wanted the defendant to admit to the offense to avoid jail time. Client therefore hired Attorney Topazio, who scheduled the case for a pre-trial conference in an attempt to persuade the prosecutor to change his mind. Attorney Topazio scheduled a conference with the court and succeeded in convincing the prosecutor to recommend pre-trial probation for the Client. The judge agreed. This means that Client does not admit to any crime, and instead needs only to stay out of further trouble. The case will ultimately be dismissed with no repercussions for Client's record.
Result: Case Dismissed. Client Avoids a Conviction and Completely Avoids the Sex Offender Registry.
September 24, 2007
Lowell District Court
0711AC1426
Application for Criminal Complaint
The defendant, an out of state attorney, was charged with defacement of property of a local hotel in Billerica Massachusetts after causing severe damage to his room. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to represent him at a hearing before a clerk magistrate. Attorney Topazio first arranged for a meeting with the police prosecutor, then negotiated with the hotel manager regarding restitution. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced an assistant clerk magistrate not to issue a criminal complaint against the defendant. The defendant's criminal record remains unblemished and client's law license is unaffected.
Result: Application for Criminal Complaint dismissed.
Norfolk Superior Court
CR 2006-00060
Assault to Murder ch 265 § 15 and
Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon ch 265 § 15B
The defendant, who was in the military reserves, was with two other army reservists and a third individual out drinking prior to being deployed to Iraq. After leaving a drinking establishment at Marina Bay in Quincy, the defendant and his friends were accosted by a group of people who objected to their singing military cadence songs and a fight broke out. The defendant fought with an individual who was later stabbed by a co-defendant who was not an army reservist. During the fight, a total of two individuals were stabbed. The defendant gave a statement to police without the advice of counsel and things did not go well for him and he was charged with Assault to Murder and Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to defend him in this case. Attorney Topazio challenged the indictment In Norfolk Superior Court with the filings of various motions. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Court to dismiss the assault to murder charges. Attorney Topazio argued that the indictment was defective on the theory that the grand jury had insufficient evidence on the joint venture theory and could not establish that the defendant knew that his companion was going to stab the victim merely by being present at the scene of the crime.
Result: Case Dismissed and the defendant was allowed to be deployed to military service.
July 6, 2007
North Reading Police
Accord and Satisfaction
The defendant was accused with vandalizing a neighbor's house. When confronted by detectives who were investigating the case, the client hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio successfully protected his client from being charged criminally and entered into an Accord and Satisfaction with the neighbor for her damages. As a result of the civil settlement, and by keeping the police informed of the resolution, the police agreed not to press criminal charges.
Result: No Criminal charges issued and case settled out of court with police.
May 25, 2007
Plymouth District Court
Clerk Magistrate's Hearing
Shoplifting ch 266 § 30A
Client, a mother of small children was shopping in Wal-Mart and accused of shoplifting by asportation. The client received a summons to appear at a clerk's hearing to answer to the charges. Attorney Topazio convinced the assistant clerk magistrate not to issue the complaint against Client.
Result: Application for Complaint Dismissed.
March 29, 2007
Board of Registration in Pharmacy
PH 06-076
Complaint for Discipline/Failure to adhere to the standards of practice in pharmacy
The client, a pharmacist, diverted federally controlled substances for his own use from a pharmacy where he was employed. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to prevent his license from being suspended and to prevent criminal charges from being filed against him. Attorney Topazio suggested that the client voluntarily resign from his position of employment and then arranged for a meeting with the special investigator from the Department of Public Protection, and presented mitigating factors for the client's actions. Attorney Topazio established that no members of the public's health were put at risk by the client's actions. Attorney Topazio was persuasive in getting the Board to issue an Advisory Letter against the client, which did not constitute discipline, instead of suspending his license. The defendant's criminal record remains unblemished and client's pharmacy license was unaffected.
Result: Complaint for Discipline dismissed and no criminal charges issued.
March 14, 2007
Chelsea District Court
(Omitted due to expungement)
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
The defendant an Inspector for the MBTA hired Attorney Topazio to seal his criminal record which consisted of two counts, one for assault and battery and the other for threats. The defendant was pursuing further employment with the MBTA and was applying for an upper management position which was a safety sensitive position dealing with issues regarding his company's business dealings. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record based on a compelling state interest and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he has no record despite being arrested, charged and convicted of a crime.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
November 9, 2006
United States District Court
06-40003
Structuring to Avoid Reporting Requirements 31 U.S.C § 5324(a)(3)
The defendant was investigated by postal inspectors who discovered that the defendant attempted to send $18,000 in money orders in a package which unfortunately could not be delivered. The defendant admitted to inspectors that he purchased 18 money orders from nine different post offices because he knew that if he asked for money orders in the amount of $3,000, the clerks would require him to complete paperwork and would ask for identification. The defendant told inspectors that he did not want to tell clerks about the source of the money. The defendant, who was arrested and further detained on an immigration detainer due to outstanding ICE deportation proceedings, hired Attorney Topazio. The U.S. Attorney tried to link the defendant with an interstate drug ring and laundering money in excess of $100,000. Attorney Topazio was successful in preventing the establishment of the drug link thus limiting his client's exposure. Despite facing a maximum term of imprisonment of 5 years in federal custody, Attorney Topazio was successful in obtaining the defendant's release from custody on a sentence of time served after being held for 12 months.
Result: Defendant avoids additional more serious charges and pleads to time served.
March 1, 2006
Middlesex Superior Court
CR 2005-00054
Armed Robbery ch 265 § 17
The defendant was charged as an accomplice to armed robbery of a Somerville Quick Mart when a co-defendant's image was captured on the store video surveillance system. The co-defendant when interviewed by police admitted to the crime and identified the defendant as his accomplice. A review of the store videotape showed an image of the defendant in the store before it was robbed. Attorney Topazio was hired by the defendant and extensive investigation was conducted on the case. Attorney Topazio discovered that one week prior to the armed robbery a police report was filed against the co-defendant for allegedly breaking and entering into the defendant's home with the intent to commit a felony. Due to this discovery, at a plea hearing on the co-defendant's case, the Judge indicated that her plea offer of committed time to the co-defendant created a scenario where the co-defendant could refuse to testify against the defendant if he had a valid Fifth Amendment privilege not to. Attorney Topazio demonstrated through his investigation and legal research that the courts apply broad standards in determining whether a claim of privilege against self-incrimination is justified and that the standards are highly protective of the constitutionally guaranteed right against self-incrimination. From a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case Attorney Topazio convinced the court that the co-defendant could refuse to testify against the defendant even after he pled guilty. Attorney Topazio's motion to dismiss for want of prosecution was allowed.
Result: Case Dismissed.
Milford District Court
0466CR0717
Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol 4th Offence ch 90 § 24
The defendant was arrested after being stopped for a marked lane violation and charged with operating under the influence of alcohol, 4th offense and faced a mandatory two (2) year prison sentence. The defendant submitted to field sobriety tests that he claimed he passed but which the officer claimed he failed and arrested the defendant. The defendant was offered a plea to a reduced charge of a third offense six (6) month mandatory sentence, which he rejected. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio to try the case. At trial in the Milford District Court, Attorney Topazio was successful in introducing into evidence a booking video and cruiser video to establish reasonable doubt as to the defendant's sobriety. Through successful courtroom presentation and cross examination of Commonwealth witnesses and arresting officer, Attorney Topazio was able to establish reasonable doubt and obtain a not guilty finding for the defendant.
Result: Not Guilty verdict after trial. Defendant avoids serving mandatory jail time and losing his drivers license for 10 years.
East Boston District Court
(Omitted at client's request)
(Omitted due to expungement)
Seal criminal records M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A, 100C
Client, a foreign exchange trader for a publicly traded business listed on the NASDAC stock exchange, had pled guilty to the charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and successfully completed a two year period of probation. The defendant concerned that any potential future employer or the Division of Professional Licensure would look unfavorable upon any application for a license or employment if aware of his criminal record hired Attorney Topazio to petition the court to seal the official record regarding the client's record. Attorney Topazio convinced the judge to seal the Client's record and now he can truthfully answer on any job or school application that he was never arrested, charged or convicted of this crime.
Result: Case Permanently Sealed.
Suffolk Superior Court
SUCR2004-10905
Conspiracy to Violate the Drug laws (Oxycontins) ch 274 § 7
The defendant was arrested with a co-defendant as the result of a motor vehicle stop where over 500 oxycontins were found in the motor vehicle and in excess of eight thousand dollars ($8000.00) and marijuana was found on the defendant. The defendant was initially charged with trafficking in oxycontins, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in a school zone and conspiracy to violate the drug laws out of the Chelsea District Court where the Defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Although the defendant was subsequently indicted to Suffolk Superior Court and faced mandatory jail time, through the efforts of Attorney Topazio, the defendant avoided all jail time upon a successfully negotiated plea to the charge of conspiracy only by convincing the Commonwealth to dismiss the trafficking charge pending against the defendant. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the prosecutor that the defendant was present with the co-defendant as a potential purchaser and not joint venturer in the sale of the oxycontins.
Result: Trafficking charge against the defendant is dismissed and defendant avoids mandatory jail time.
Quincy District Court
0456 CR 6410
Pre-trial probation pursuant to ch. 276, §87
The defendant was a pharmacy technician and engaged in a scheme to divert controlled substances to her boyfriend. When caught, she agreed to a consent degree from the Board of Registration in Pharmacy that she was impaired and would submit to substance abuse treatment. The client hired Attorney Topazio to defend her in the criminal matter. Attorney Topazio continued this case for a pre-trial conference and was successful in convincing the prosecutor to place the defendant on pre-trial probation pursuant to MGL, Ch. 276, §87 for such time and upon such conditions as the Court deemed proper instead of having her admit to the charges.
Result: Case Dismissed after period of pretrial probation. Client Avoids a Conviction and keeps her professional license.
January, 2005
Framingham District Court
9649CR0429
9949CR0731
Motion for New Trial
The Defendant represented himself and pled guilty to a shoplifting and assault and battery back in 1999. The defendant who was a Green Card Resident Alien thereafter petitioned the Immigration and Naturalization Court to become a United States Citizen but was advised that his criminal convictions would disqualify him. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio for help. Attorney Topazio filed a motion for new trial and requested that the Court vacate the guilty finding entered on April 28, 1999 and grant a new trial. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Court that the docket on the defendant's case did not reflect that the trial judge who accepted the defendant's guilty plea gave him a colloquy on the record, as required by Mass R. Crim.P. 12 (c) (3) to ensure that the defendant acted voluntarily and understood the consequences of his plea. The Court granted the defendant a new trial on shoplifting charge which ultimately got dismissed.
Result: Guilty conviction vacated and case dismissed. Defendant removes from his criminal record a conviction for a crime of moral turpitude which helps him with citizenship.
