Probation Violation Attorney, Boston Massachusetts | Boston Probation Lawyer
Massachusetts Probation Violation Attorney
Contact Boston Probation Violation Attorney Steven J. Topazio for Representation in a Probation Violation Proceeding
Probation is a type of punishment that may be ordered by a court as an alternative to incarceration. It involves the threat of future action if a person does not act according to the will of the court. If a Court finds a violation of your probation contract, you are subjected to being re-sentenced which could result in your incarceration.
If you have been accused of probation violation and face a surrender hearing, protect your future and family by contacting Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio for a free consultation.
Probation Violation Proceeding
An order of probation gives the Court power over a person by either requiring or forbidding any number of activities. The consequence of not complying with the list of things that you must do and may not do while on Probation will result in a Notice of Violation and Probation Surrender Hearing. There are different types of probation you may be under.
- Administrative probation means: a form of noncontact supervision in which an offender who presents a low risk of harm to the community.
- Supervised probation means: a form of contact supervision in which an offender who presents a higher risk of harm to the community.
As a condition of probation you may be under the supervision of the Office of Community Corrections OCC, or in drug court, or on sex offender probation. All are serious matters and must be dealt with accordingly. It's your life and if you want to keep it on track, you are advised to follow orders as specified in your specific case.
Boston criminal defense attorney Steven J. Topazio can handle your VOP (Violation of Probation) matter quickly and effectively. Do not hesitate to call his office today to set up an appointment for a face-to-face meeting.
What is a Probation Violation?
In Massachusetts, if a defendant breaks any of the rules imposed upon him or her during the probationary period, his or her probation can be revoked and jail time could be required.
Types of Probation Violations
- Failure to pay a fine
- Failure to pay restitution to the victim
- Failure to enroll in or complete rehabilitation or community service
- Failure to appear in court for a progress report
- Violation of probation rules, including:
- Staying away from certain person(s)
- Staying away from certain location(s)
- Reporting to probation officer when expected
- Possession of illegal drugs or weapons (guns)
- Associating with known criminals
- Committing new crimes (picking up new criminal cases)
What Happens When Probation Is Violated?
The penalty for violation of probation depends on how serious the violation is. If the probation is not serious, chances are the defendant will be given a second chance and will be allowed to remain on probation under the same terms and conditions. If a more serious violation occurs, then there will likely be a violation of probation with some consequences.
If a probation violation occurs, the defendant could be arrested or ordered to court, by means of official mail notification, for a probation violation hearing. At the probation violation hearing, the probation officer must prove the defendant violated probation. If the defendant is found to have violated his probation, the court may impose one of several punishments.
Probation Violations Consequences
- Potential jail or prison sentence
- Probation extension
- Additional probation terms imposed
- Probation revoked and suspended sentence imposed
- Probation reinstated with same terms and conditions or different terms
- Community service
- Rehabilitation / Counseling / Treatment Program
Factors Considered for a Probation Violation
The outcome of your probation violation will vary, depending upon several factors considered by the Judge and your probation officer. A skilled attorney, such as Boston criminal defense attorney Steven J. Topazio, can prepare you for the probation violation hearing, and make a difference in the final result.
Probation Violations Considerations
- The seriousness and nature of the probation violation
- The number of times you previously violated your probation
- Whether the probation violation involves a new crime
- Mitigating and aggravating circumstances
- The attitude of the probation department or probation officer
- The timing of the probation violation (whether it happened early in the probationary period or at the end of the probationary period)
Comprehensive Investigation and Case-Building
If you have been accused of probation violation and face a surrender hearing, protect your future and family by contacting Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio for a free consultation.
RECENT CASE DECISIONS
January 13, 2012
Milford District Court
Docket # 1066CR0853
Probation Surrender
Modification of terms of Probation
The client, a 31 year old sprinkler installer, was on probation when a warrant issued for his arrest after the client stopped reporting to his assigned probation officer, and failed to submit to random urine tests, hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted his client’s probation officer to negotiate a compromise where his client could be surrendered and released pending a final surrender hearing. Attorney Topazio obtained his client’s employment records and verification of substance abuse treatment, and provided verification to the probation officer. On November 7, 2011, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to release his client on personal recognizance pending a final surrender hearing. During the Court hearing, Attorney Topazio requested that in lieu of surrendering his client, that the court modify the terms and conditions of his client’s probation. Attorney Topazio pointed out that since being on probation, his client had completed everything that had been required of him and was substance free, with no dirty urine tests, despite being tested twice per month. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to withdraw the violation of probation, and to modify his client’s terms and conditions of probation by reducing the twice monthly urine tests to once per month and by reducing his requirement to attend AA five times per week to twice per week.
Result: Probation violation withdrawn and client’s terms of probation modified.
November 07, 2011
Milford District Court
Docket # 1066CR0853
Probation Surrender
Probation warrant
The client, a 31 year old sprinkler installer, was on probation when a warrant issued for his arrest after the client stopped reporting to his assigned probation officer, and failed to submit to random urine tests, hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted his client’s probation officer to negotiate a compromise where his client could be surrendered and released pending a final surrender hearing. Attorney Topazio obtained his client’s employment records and verification of substance abuse treatment, and provided verification to the probation officer. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to release his client on personal recognizance pending a final surrender hearing.
Result: Warrant withdrawn and client released on personal recognizance. Case pending.
.
September 22, 2011
Chelsea District Court
Docket No.: 1014CR2955
OUI – DUI - DWI c. 90 § 24
Probation Surrender Hearing
The Client, a 33 year old licensed electrician, who had received a CWOF on a drunk driving offense and was required to complete an alcohol education program as a condition of his probation, received a Notice of Probation Violation and Hearing form his probation officer when he was thrown out of the 24D program and also found to be abusing prescription pain killers, was represented by Criminal Defense Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his Client’s probation officer in an attempt to get his client back into the 24D program and argued to prevent his client’s CWOF from being revoked if his client stipulated to a violation of his probation. Today, despite his Client’s Probation Officer’s opposition, stipulated to a violation of probation, and Attorney Topazio persuaded the Court to extend his Client’s term of probation by 2 months, instead of revoking the CWOF and imposing a guilty finding, which would have caused a one year suspension of his client’s right to operate a motor vehicle, provided his client reenter and complete the 24D program during that time.
Result: Client stipulates to a violation of probation yet preserves his CWOF.
July 19, 2011
Dedham District Court
1054CR1826
Violation of Probation
The defendant, who had previously admitted to sufficient facts and received a CWOF to a drug offense for possession of a Class D substance and placed on probation in the Dedham District Court, was arrested on a possession of a Class B substance charge out of the Wrentham District Court while on that probation and faced a probation surrender, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio was confronted with the dilemma at the initial probation surrender hearing in convincing the court not to detain his client pending the final surrender hearing. The probation officer was recommending detention which the court had indicated it was inclined to follow. Attorney Topazio argued that the police report on the underlying charge, the main basis of the violation, was the result of an unconstitutional stop. A further condition of his client’s probation was that he was to remain drug free, a factor that had yet to be determined but was of greater concern for the court. Attorney Topazio learned that upon his client’s arrest that the Wrentham Court had his client drug tested and that the test results would probably come back positive, an additional basis to surrender his client. Attorney Topazio realized that if his client were detained, that detention would cost him his liberty, job, and integrity. In lieu of continuing his client’s case for a Final Surrender Hearing, which was his client’s constitutional right, and risk detention, Attorney Topazio conferenced the case with the court and suggested that if his client’s probation were renewed, the CWOF not vacated, and his client not detained, that his client would waive the final surrender hearing and stipulate to a violation on the added condition that his client submit a substance abuse evaluation, and the court agreed. Guilty findings on any drug charges would have resulted in the collateral consequence of causing a license suspension, and expose his client to up to 2 ½ years’ incarceration. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded his probation officer and the judge not to commit his client despite the subsequent drug offense, but to allow his Client to stipulate to a violation and to renew his probation to the original date, thus preserving the CWOF and his client’s driving privileges.
Result: Client is placed back on probation and avoids incarceration despite the stipulation to a probation violation to a similar criminal charge.
December 10, 2010
Suffolk Superior Court
06-10963-001
Probation Surrender Hearing
Recall of Default Warrant
Unarmed Robbery
The defendant, who was on probation out of Suffolk Superior Court, hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to represent him when he received a notice of surrender and hearing for alleged violations of his probation. The defendant allegedly violated his probation when he picked up a new criminal offense and as a result stopped reporting to his probation officer out of fear that he would be incarcerated. Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio contacted his client’s probation officer and arranged to have him voluntarily surrender himself. By accompanying his client when he appeared in court to remove the default warrant, Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio was prepared to argue against revoking his client’s recognizance or holding him on bail. Today, as a result of thorough preparation and being able to control the circumstances of his client’s surrender, Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio was able to convince the court not to hold his client on bail despite being arrested while on probation and being in default and on the run for several months.
Result: Default warrant recalled and defendant released on personal recognizance pending final probation surrender hearing. Case pending.
August 20, 2010
Suffolk Superior Court
07-10889-003
Violation of Probation
The defendant, who had previously been found guilty of two drug offenses and placed on probation in Suffolk Superior Court, was arrested on a felony larceny charge while on that probation and faced a probation surrender, hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio was successful at the initial probation surrender hearing in convincing the court not to detain his client pending the final surrender hearing. Once he caused his client to be released on his own recognizance, Attorney Topazio obtained the police report on the underlying charge which was the main basis of the violation and attacked the strength of that case. Over the course of several months, Attorney Topazio counseled his Client and negotiated with his probation officer. The Final Surrender Hearing is a court proceeding where the probation officer tries to convince a judge, using a preponderance of the evidence standard, that you have violated your probation. The probation officer tries to prove his case by introducing evidence of the alleged violations. Common examples of evidence used at a Final Surrender Hearing are the probation officer's own observations, testimony of live civilian and law enforcement witnesses, drug test results, and police reports. One major difference between a criminal trial and a probation surrender hearing is the level of proof the Commonwealth has to meet. In a trial, the prosecutor must convince the finder of fact (the judge or the jury) that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In a probation surrender, the probation officer must convince the judge that the probationer violated his probation by a preponderance of the evidence, which is a much lower standard than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. . Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded his probation officer and the judge not to commit his client despite the pending felony charge against his client, but to allow his Client to stipulate to a violation and to renew his probation to the original date.
Result: Client is placed back on probation and avoids incarceration despite the stipulation to a probation violation
June 21, 2010
Brookline District Court
9809CR0221
Warrant
Probation Violation
The defendant, who was living in Hawaii, could not renew her license when she found out there was an outstanding warrant for her arrest in the Brookline District Court, hired Attorney Topazio to represent her. Attorney Topazio went to the Brookline Court and discovered the warrant was for defaulting on a probation case. Attorney Topazio met with the Probation Officer assigned to his client’s case to see if the case could be resolved without his client having to appear because she was stuck in Hawaii and could not travel without identification. Today, Attorney Topazio appeared in the Brookline District Court and caused the Court to recall the outstanding warrant against his client in her absence, and caused fines to be paid so as to allow the court to close the case against his client.
Result: After hearing client’s appearance waived, default warrant withdrawn and case closed.
May 25, 2010
Lowell District Court
0811 CR 6509
Motion to Terminate Probation
The defendant, who was on probation, wanted to terminate his probation early, and hired Attorney Topazio. On May 12, 2009, the defendant pled guilty to the lesser included offense of Assault and Battery and was placed on probation for two (2) years to May 12, 2011, with conditions of probation that included, among other things, random alcohol and drug testing, and counseling. Attorney Topazio contacted his client’s therapist and learned that his client completed all the behavior modification and parenting skills that he had worked on with his therapist during his therapeutic sessions and obtained a report confirming same. Attorney Topazio contacted his client’s probation officer and negotiated with her and reached an agreement that she would not oppose his client’s motion to terminate. Attorney Topazio filed a motion to terminate his client’s probation and argued in court that his client had met all the terms of his probation and was in compliance with the terms of his probation since May 12, 2009 and that all the goals of probation were met and requested that his client’s probation be terminated early. Despite the lack of opposition form probation, the court took no action on the motion to terminate probation and suggested that the motion be argued at a later date because the court reasoned that not enough time had gone by to allow the motion at that time. Nevertheless, the Court acknowledged the defendant’s progress and rewarded him by vacating all conditions of probation, and further ordered that the supervised probation be changed to limited supervision, with no reporting and vacating all remaining payments.
Result: No action on Motion to Terminate Probation subject to argument at a later date but all conditions of probation vacated and supervised probation converted to limited probation with no reporting.
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.
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.
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.
February 20, 2009
Malden District Court
0950CR0025; 0650CR3512; 0650CR2268
Probation Surrender
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.
Criminal Defense
Personal Injury
OUI Penalties
Personal Injury
Criminal Defense
