Motor Vehicle Crimes Attorney, Boston Massachusetts | Boston Massachusetts Accident Lawyer
Boston Motor Vehicle Crimes Attorney
Contact Boston Accident Attorney Steven J. Topazio
A motor vehicle crime refers to an illegal or unlawful act which is committed with some form of motor vehicle, automobile, car, truck, SUV, or motorcycle. Any driver, who is convicted of a moving violation may face jail time, suffer a loss of their driving privileges, and be assessed points on his insurance for each conviction.
A conviction for driving while intoxicated (DUI) has serious consequences, including incarceration and the loss of driving privileges. You rely on driving to fulfill school, work, and family obligations, and suspension of your license may make it very difficult to fulfill those commitments. If your license has been suspended or revoked, you want your license back—and you want it back now.
The first important question that needs to be answered when you are charged with a motor vehicle crime such as drinking and driving in Massachusetts is whether this is your first offense, second offense, or third or subsequent offense. Therefore, the categorization of any prior offenses is crucial in determining your penalties for this charge.
Some motor vehicle crimes, such as larceny of a motor vehicle, involve the unlawful taking of a vehicle from another without his consent. Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio has experience defending clients against motor vehicle crimes such as this, and others including:
- Operating Without a License
- Operating After Suspension or Revocation of License
- Operating Negligently so as to Endanger
- Operating an Uninsured Motor Vehicle
- Drunk Driving/OUI, DWI, DUI
- Vehicular Homicide
- Racing or Drag Racing
- Carjacking
- Use of a Motor Vehicle Without Authority
- Leaving the Scene of an Accident
- Minor Traffic Violations
Penalties for Motor Vehicle Crimes in Boston
The penalties for a motor vehicle crime in Boston will depend on whether you have been charged with a Felony or Misdemeanor offense. Felony motor vehicle crimes, such as receiving a stolen motor vehicle, carjacking, and felony OUI, may result in significant jail time upon conviction. Misdemeanor motor vehicle crimes can also result in a committed sentence, but generally the punishment is not as severe as a felony conviction. Minor Traffic Violations, such as speeding or marked lane offesnes, usually involve a monetary fine, points being assessed against your driving record, and in some cases, your driver’s license being suspended.
Comprehensive Investigation and Case-Building
Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio is prepared to investigate every aspect of the allegations and circumstances of your case, in order to identify the right strategy and build an aggressive defense on your behalf. Contact Attorney Topazio online or call 617-422-5803 to discuss your case.
RECENT CASE DECISIONS
December 29, 2011
Waltham District Court
1152CR1948
Unregistered Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 § 9
Uninsured Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 § 34J
The client, a 43 year old, went through a red light and received a summons to appear in court because her car was unregistered and uninsured when checked by Watertown Police. Attorney Topazio met with the Watertown Police Prosecutor in an attempt to resolve his client’s case. Today, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting the criminal charge against his client dismissed after a finding of responsible filed on the civil infraction of unregistered motor vehicle, thus preserving his client’s CORI.
Result: Case dismissed.
December 01, 2011
Woburn District Court
Docket # 1153AC1085
Application for Criminal Complaint
Unlicensed Operation, MGL c. 90 § 10
Fail to Inspect MGL c. 90 § 20
Unsafe Passing MGL c. 89 § 2
The client, a 37 year old scientist with no prior criminal history, received a citation with both criminal and civil violations when he passed a line of cars in route to a job interview, hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio obtained his client’s Curriculum Vitae and registry documentation in anticipation of the court hearing. Attorney Topazio discovered that his client failed to obtain a Massachusetts license when he moved here from Colorado during the beginning of the year after accepting employment with Pfizer, Inc. Despite accepting employment and relocating to Massachusetts, Pfizer unfortunately laid off the client due to the sluggish economy. The client, who became trapped in Massachusetts with his family in search of employment, did not consider himself a permanent resident of Massachusetts which requires that every resident must apply for a driver’s license within 30 days of establishing residency. The client believed his valid Colorado driver’s license was sufficient in Massachusetts since he was seeking employment in several states when he received the criminal citation. At the Magistrate’s hearing, Attorney Topazio established that his client applied for and received his Massachusetts driver’s license and had his car inspected the day after receipt of the citation. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Magistrate to dismiss the criminal violation of unlicensed operation and civil violation of inspection violation, thus preserving his client’s clean criminal record or CORI. The Magistrate only assessed the client $100.00 for the civil violation of unsafe passing.
Result: Criminal complaint dismissed and client preserve’s clean CORI.
November 02, 2011
Framingham Juvenile Court
Docket Intentionally Omitted
Operating to Endanger M.G.L. c. 90 § 24(2)(a)
Marked lane violation
The client, a 16 year old High School Student, received a criminal citation for operating to endanger after he crashed his motor vehicle into a tree after knocking over a mailbox and causing property damage. Attorney Topazio instructed his client to sign the back of the citation and to file it with the court within four days so as to preserve his client’s right to a magistrate’s hearing. Requesting a clerk’s hearing prevents the immediate issuance of a criminal complaint which in turn would also result in his client getting a criminal record. Attorney Topazio had his client obtain a copy of his school grades and documentation of school accomplishments; such as his client’s acceptance into the National Honor Society and Peer Ministry, among other things, in order to establish his client’s good character for the clerk at the upcoming hearing. Attorney Topazio met with the investigating officer in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the matter and further to resolve any restitution matters. Today at the hearing on the application for issuance of criminal complaint, Attorney Topazio established through his client’s medical records that he was not drinking or consuming illegal drugs prior to the accident. Attorney Topazio also established that his client was not speeding or racing when the accident occurred, but rather established that the accident occurred as the result of his client falling asleep at the wheel. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint, despite the Magistrate’s finding probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed, but rather to hold the complaint open for four months on the condition that his client stay out of trouble and complete a community service project through his peer ministry group at school by writing an article about the dangers and hazards of driving and then presenting it in school.
Result: Formal complaint does not issue and case to be dismissed following completion of community service project.
October 24, 2011
Woburn District Court
Docket No: 1153CR1664
Operating with suspended registration c 90 § 23
Uninsured Motor Vehicle c 90 § 34J
Possession of Class E Drug c 94C § 34
Unregistered Motor Vehicle c 90C § 9
The Client, a 24 year old office supply delivery truck driver, was stopped by police when they randomly ran his license plate and discovered that his registration and insurance were suspended. The client’s registration was revoked due to the fact that the client was unaware that he allowed his insurance to lapse. After the police conducted a motor vehicle stop, the client was asked to get out of his car so the police could conduct an inventory search. During the inventory search 14 unused syringes and a liquid later identified as steroids for intramuscular injection were found. Any conviction for any possession charge in Massachusetts carries the collateral consequence of causing a one (1) year loss of driving privileges which the client could not afford. Attorney Topazio had his client cure the insurance problem and re-register his motor vehicle and to provide him with verification of same. Today in court, Attorney Topazio lobbied his client’s case with the judge and was successful in convincing the court and prosecutor to dismiss all charges and to give his client a three (3) month period of pre-trial probation on the possession of class E (steroid) charge, thus preserving his client’s record and driver’s license.
Result: Charges dismissed and client avoids loss of license by agreeing to pre-trial probation.
October 05, 2011
Chelsea District Court
Docket No: 1114CR1264
Reckless Operation of Motor Vehicle c 90 § 24(2)(a)
The Client, a 51 year old individual, received a citation and summons to appear in court on a criminal charge of reckless operation after the client crashed his car into a parked car, causing the parked car to strike a fire hydrant shearing it off at the base. The police report stated that when the police were dispatched to the scene of the accident, the officer approached the defendant and questioned him as to what happened and the defendant stated he was traveling “too fast” up the street and “misjudged” the distance he had to get through. Primarily as a result of the client’s statements to police is the reason why the client was criminally charged. Attorney Topazio argued that not all accidents are criminal and filed a motion to dismiss the charge alleging that the evidence presented was not sufficient to establish probable cause to issue the complaint. Attorney Topazio argued that in determining whether the defendant drove recklessly, a clerk should take into account all the facts of the situation: the defendant’s rate of speed and manner of operation, the defendant’s physical condition and how well he could see and could control his vehicle, the condition of the defendant’s vehicle, what kind of a road it was and who else was on the road, what the time of day, the weather and the condition of the road were, what any other vehicles or pedestrians were doing, and any other factors that the clerk would think are relevant. Attorney Topazio argued that it is not enough for the Commonwealth to prove that the defendant acted negligently—that is, acted in a way that a reasonably careful person would not. It must be shown that the defendant’s actions went beyond mere negligence and amounted to recklessness. A defendant is reckless if he knew, or should have known, that such actions would pose a grave danger of death or serious injury to others, but he chose, nevertheless, to run the risk and go ahead. Today at the hearing on the motion to dismiss, Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the District Attorney to dismiss the case against his client on court costs and the court agreed.
Result: Case dismissed.
October 07, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
1001CR0804
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 §24(2)(a)
Crosswalk Violation M.G.L. c. 89 §11
The defendant, who was accused of nearly running a pedestrian over, was arrested after Boston police reviewed a recording of the incident from a Boston City Hall Security camera. According to the police report, the video was requested and preserved. Attorney Topazio, who represented the defendant, requested a copy of the video from the Commonwealth and indicated said request on a pre-trial conference report that was filed with the court. The case was continued several times for the production of the video. After the Commonwealth failed to produce the video, Attorney Topazio filed a motion to dismiss the charges arguing that the officer’s refusal to produce the video after requested by the Commonwealth denies the defendant the opportunity to obtain potentially exculpatory evidence of the entire event which was captured on video. Attorney Topazio argued that the video, which was either lost or destroyed, was potentially exculpatory and when evidence is lost or destroyed, the court must employ a balancing test to determine the appropriateness and extent of remedial action. Attorney Topazio relied on case law that suggested that the trial judge must weigh the culpability of the Commonwealth and its agents, the materiality of the evidence, and the potential prejudice to the defendant and argued that dismissal of all the charges was the only remedy available to his client to correct the harm done. Today, Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the court to dismiss the criminal charges against his client due to the loss of evidence.
Result: Motion to dismiss case allowed.
October 06, 2010
East Boston District Court
Magistrate Hearing
Use/Avoid Easy pass lane
The defendant, a Boston cab driver who relies on his driver’s license to earn a living, received a citation from a State Trooper for not using the easy pass lane when entering the Sumner Tunnel as required by law, hired Attorney Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio instructed his client to appeal the citation so as to be granted a Magistrate’s hearing so he could contest the citation. Today, Attorney Topazio, as a result of his experience and understanding of the different ways of resolving traffic violations, persuaded the Clerk Magistrate to find his client not responsible.
Result: After hearing Defendant found not responsible and maintains his client’s driver's license, protecting his livelihood.
September 22, 2010
Lowell District Court
1011CR2739
Negligent Operation of Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 §24(2)(a)
Marked Lanes Violation M.G.L. c. 89 §4A
Operating with a Suspended License M.G.L. c. 90 §23
Speeding M.G.L. c. 90 §17
The defendant, a United States Marine who recently returned from a tour in Iraq, was cited for operating negligently when State Police observed him traveling in excess of 95 mph and making aggressive lane changes. The State Police pursued the defendant and had to accelerate to speeds in excess of 120 mph to catch him. When the defendant was stopped he was also cited for operating with a suspended license, marked lanes violation and speeding. The defendant initially represented himself on the case but was unsuccessful in his attempts at resolving it without a finding of guilty and responsible finding on the civil infractions. A guilty finding on either criminal infraction not only carried the potential for jail but would result in the client’s driving license being suspended. When the District Attorney’s office moved the case towards trial, the defendant hired Attorney Topazio. After a lengthy period of negations with the District Attorney, today Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the court to dismiss the criminal charges against his client on the payment of court fines and having his client found not responsible on both civil infractions.
Result: Case dismissed on payment of court fines and record and driving privileges preserved.
August 11, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
0901CR7893
Leaving Scene of Property Damage M.G.L. c. 90 § 24
Number Plate Violation to Conceal M.G.L. c. 90 § 23
Uninsured Motor Vehicle M.G.L. c. 90 § 34J
Operating a Motor Vehicle with License Revoked as HTO M.G.L. c. 90 § 23
The defendant, had his right to operate a motor vehicle in Massachusetts revoked as a Habitual Traffic Offender, was represented by Attorney Topazio after being arrested for various motor vehicle offenses following the crash of his motor vehicle on 93S in Boston which, after questioning by police, it was learned he abandoned. Upon investigation of the case Attorney Topazio learned his client was called to the State Police Tunnels Barracks to answer questions about my motor vehicle which was abandoned on Route 93S. Images of the crash were captured on tunnel surveillance cameras. The client was told to bring proof of ownership to clear up the situation to avoid being charged. The client arrived at State Police Tunnels Barracks with the requested documents but while there was told that he had to answer several questions before he could get his car back. The answers to those questions resulted in the defendant being arrested. Attorney Topazio filed motions to suppress his client’s statements and motions to dismiss because his client was questioned without being informed of his Miranda rights, and made incriminating statements. The procedural safeguards of Miranda are required not where a suspect is merely in police custody, but rather where a suspect is subjected to custodial interrogation. Interrogation must reflect a measure of compulsion above and beyond that inherent in custody itself, and therefore Miranda warnings are only required when a person in custody is subjected to either express questioning or its functional equivalent. The term 'functional equivalent' includes any words or actions on the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect. In this context, an 'incriminating response' includes any response inculpatory or exculpatory, which the prosecution might seek to use against the suspect at trial. Today at a hearing on the motion to suppress, Attorney Topazio was successful in getting all but the Number Plate violation against his client dismissed.
Result: At Motion to Suppress hearing, illegal statements obtained by police resulted in charges being dismissed.
May 28, 2010
Chelsea District Court
0914 CR 3290
False Report of Motor Vehicle Theft, M.G.L. c. 268, § 39
The defendant, a professional mother of a young child, was arrested after making a false report that her motor vehicle was stolen, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio discovered that his client made the false report because her boyfriend pressured her into doing so when he was allegedly seen by police abandoning her car which he had been using, which later was found to contain 34 plastic bags of cocaine. At his client’s arraignment, Attorney Topazio met with the District Attorney in an attempt to resolve his client’s case, arguing that his client was coerced into breaking the law by her boyfriend and thus not responsible. Attorney Topazio pointed out that his client, who had no criminal record, allegedly confessed to the police as to what she had done and took responsibility for her actions. Attorney Topazio pointed out that his client’s boyfriend pressured his client to report the car stolen so he wouldn't get arrested. Today, after several court appearances, Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney to place his client on pre-trial probation for a period of six months, instead of having his client plead guilty or admit to sufficient facts, thus preserving her record and career.
Result: Client placed on pre-trial probation and avoids a trial and a felony conviction thus preserving her record and career.
May 19, 2010
Boston Municipal Court
Magistrate’s Hearing
Speeding, M.G.L. c. 90 § 17
No Seat Belt, M.G.L. c. 90 § 13A
The defendant, who operates a courier service, was given a citation for speeding and not wearing his seat belt, hired Attorney Topazio to represent him at a Magistrate’s Hearing. Today, Attorney Topazio argued that his client, who was nervous when stopped by police, instinctively went to remove his seatbelt which he thought was on, and was accused of being untruthful by the officer when questioned on that point. Attorney Topazio convinced the Magistrate to give his client the benefit of doubt and requested that his client be found not responsible, and the Magistrate agreed.
Result: Defendant not responsible, case closed.
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.
Criminal Defense
Personal Injury
OUI Penalties
Personal Injury
Criminal Defense
