Steven J. Topazio - Attorney At Law

The client, a successful business owner and a licensed agent for Braz Transfers, a licensed foreign transmittal agency operating under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 169, was accused of stealing in excess of $47,000.00 when it was discovered that a money bag the client delivered to Braz Transfers contained only $1,300.00 instead of the $47,000.00 due, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. The client was accused of purportedly receiving in excess of $47,000.00 from various consumers at his business, notifying Braz Transfers of the receipt of said funds and further requesting that Braz Transfers transmit $47,000.00 to foreign customers. When Braz Transfers came to pick up the $47,000.00, it alleged that the client stole the $47,000.00 when he fraudulently remitted only $1,300.00 to Braz Transfers in a money bag containing only one dollar bills. The client, a noncitizen legal resident, was also exposed to the jeopardy of deportation, denial of naturalization or exclusion from admission to the United States for a conviction of a crime such as this one. Under federal law Larceny over $250 is considered a crime of moral turpitude which would subject a legal resident to adverse immigration consequences. Attorney Topazio met with his client and interviewed his employees to evaluate his business’s internal security procedures and to determine if same were followed. Attorney Topazio investigated the business practices and procedures of Braz Transfers and reviewed its money transfer procedures so as to understand where the alleged loss may have occurred. In preparation for hearing, Attorney Topazio lined up a series of witnesses involved with the chain of custody of the money and established that his client, as well as several other employees had access to the monies and that sufficient evidence existed to convince the Magistrate that a three hour window of time existed where Braz Transfers had exclusive access to the money and could be the reason for the loss. Attorney Topazio argued that a crime had not been committed and as a result, was successful in convincing the investigating Boston Police Detectives as well as the Clerk Magistrate that the missing monies amounted to no more than a civil matter that should be pursued in civil court by the complainant instead of criminal court.

An investigation by the Boston Police Special Investigations Unit and investigators from the Insurance Fraud Bureau found that the defendant reported to his insurance company that while driving his vehicle that an unknown vehicle struck his vehicle and fled, causing over $6,000.00 worth of damage. The investigation found that the suspect did not notify the police of the hit and run. A forensic examination of the defendant’s vehicle found that the vehicle struck a stationary object while in motion. Recovered from the vehicle was creosote/wood material. When confronted with the evidence the defendant gave conflicting statements. The defendant, who abandoned his insurance claim, hired Attorney Topazio to defend him. Attorney Topazio met with the prosecuting attorney in an attempt to dispose of the case without an admission or plea, as an admission to the offence would ruin his client’s career. Attorney Topazio suggested to the Commonwealth that his client was never paid by the insurance company, that he receive a period of pre-trial probation to resolve the case. Pursuant to Massachusetts General laws, chapter 276, section 87, a court may place an individual on probation for such time and upon such conditions as it deems proper, with the defendant's consent, before trial and before a plea of guilty. Pre trial probation is a mechanism to resolve a criminal case without requiring an admission to sufficient facts or a guilty plea. If successful, the criminal charges will be dismissed outright, thus protecting an individual’s criminal record as well as his reputation. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded the Assistant District Attorney and the judge to place his client on pre-trial probation for a period of three months on the condition that his client pays a fine.

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.