Significant Cases
NOTEABLE CRIMINAL TRIALS
Commonwealth v. ####### #########; Superior Court Docket No. ## (1-2)
This case involved a reputed gang leader who was prosecuted for two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm pursuant to M.G.L. c.269, §10(H). The case was significant because it involved novel evidentiary issue concerning gang affiliation, joint venture, statements of the defendant and co-defendant, and police "zero tolerance zones". The case was tried before a jury of twelve and the Hon. James P. Donohue in the Worcester Superior Court. The Jury returned verdicts of not guilty on all counts after trial.
Commonwealth v.###### #########I; District Court Docket No.: #### ## ####
In this matter the defendant was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Liquor and Negligent Operation and Causing Serious Bodily Injury, a violation of M.G.L. c.90, § 24L(1); Operating a Motor Vehicle Negligently so as to Endanger, a violation of M.G.L. c.90, § 24; and three separate civil motor vehicle infractions. The case was significant because the defendant was operating a motorcycle with a back seat passenger when he was involved in a violent accident. The defendant struck a taxicab and both he and his passenger sustained multiple life threatening and permanent injuries. The police department's accident reconstructionists opined that at the time of the impact the defendant was traveling at a speed of approximately 52 MPH in a 30 MPH zone. Blood was drawn from the defendant at the hospital and was tested for serum ethanol levels. The level was .131, approximately .05 points higher than the limit in which a jury may infer intoxication in Massachusetts. The case was tried jury waived in the Worcester District Court Jury Session. The case centered on the cross examination of the government's experts as well as the introduction of serum conversion rates and permissible inferences that may be drawn from all such testimony. The defendant was found not guilty on all counts.
Commonwealth v. ###### ######; District Court No.: #### CR ####
This case involved a number of people involved in a dispute with a person allegedly brandishing a handgun. It was alleged that after an argument an individual displayed a handgun to another person in such a way as to cause him to become fearful. The suspect then left the scene as a passenger in a motor vehicle driven by my client. A description of the vehicle and the occupants were then transmitted to the police and the motor vehicle was stopped at a location in close proximity to the scene of the offense. The occupants were then removed from the vehicle and the back seat passenger was identified as a local gang member who was currently under investigation for a drive by shooting. The officers then searched the motor vehicle and located a firearm under the rear passenger's seat. The gun was later determined to be a possible match for the gun used in the drive by shooting. My client was a 19-year-old woman with no prior criminal history. She was charged with one count of carrying a handgun, a violation of M.G.L. c.269, §10a. That section of the criminal statute provides for minimum mandatory sentencing. She was also charged with possession of a handgun, a violation of M.G.L. c.269, §10h. The case centered on the fourth Amendment issues surrounding the stop as well as whether or not the police had reasonable suspicion to believe that the occupant had committed a crime, as it is defined by the case law. After an evidentiary hearing the evidence seized by the police was suppressed by the trial judge. The matter was thereafter dismissed for lack of prosecution as a result of the ruling.
Commonwealth v. ###### ######; Superior Court Docket No. ##-##### (1-4).
Although not tried, this case was significant because the defendant was charged with a number of "life felonies", including; Home Invasion, Armed Assault in a Dwelling, Armed Robbery; and Armed Burglary. The alleged facts of the case involved a number of high profile gang members breaking into a home and beating and murdering the occupant of the apartment and shooting his wife. My client was alleged to be a participant at the scene as well as the owner of the gun used during the crime. My client was held in custody for almost one year before all indictments were dismissed against him. The alleged shooter was tried and convicted of first-degree murder. The case took an extensive amount of time to investigate. There were numerous evidentiary hearings related to all facets of the case. My client refused to testify for the prosecution and waived his Fifth Amendment privilege in order to testify on behalf of the defendant at the murder trial. After a brief voire dire, the defendant elected not to ask my client any questions. The case had fascinating evidentiary and negotiation issues. All charges were dismissed against my client at the request of the prosecution.
Commonwealth v. ##### #######; District Court Docket No.: #### CR ######
In this matter the defendant, a tow truck driver, was alleged to have been involved in a "road rage" incident with an off duty correctional officer. The incident culminated with the defendant allegedly ramming the correctional officer's vehicle from behind and then backing up and ramming the vehicle five more times. The defendant was charged with five separate counts of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon, a violation of M.G.L. C.265, §15A and one count of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250.00, a violation of M.G.L. C.266, §127. The case was tried before a six-member jury in Worcester and the defendant was found not guilty on all counts. The case was significant because it involved the introduction of videotaped simulations to aid the jury. On the advice of counsel, the defendant elected not to testify because of the risk of the introduction of his prior criminal convictions. Counsel was therefore forced to rely on the video simulation as well as effective cross-examination of the Commonwealth's witnesses to create reasonable doubt.
Commonwealth v. ###### #######: Superior Court Indictment No ##-######
The defendant was charged with Aggravated Rape by the Shrewsbury Police Department and indicted on one count of Rape. The complainant alleged that she had fallen asleep after a night out in a limousine with the defendant and a number of friends. She was then carried up to a bedroom by the defendant and placed in bed. The other members of the party then went to other bedrooms in the house and went to sleep. Later that night it is alleged that the defendant went into the complainant's room and raped her. The complainant made fresh complaint statements to the other occupants of the house and then ran from the house and called a family memeber to pick her up. The case was tried in the Worcester Superior Court for two days before Donahue, J. and a twelve person jury. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Commonwealth v.##### #######i, Milford District Court (Worcester Jury) Docket No.: ###### CR ######.
In this case the defendant was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Liquor, 2nd Offense, Possession of Class D. Controlled Substance, Subsequent Offense and a marked lane violation. The defendant was video taped via a cruiser mounted video and during the booking process. The conversation between the police officer and the defendant were recorded while the defendant was being transported to the police station. During the conversation the defendant's speech was slurred and he made a number of inculpatory statements. The court allowed the defendant's motion to exclude the conversations which occurred while the defendant was being transported. The case was then bifurcated and the defendant admitted sufficient facts to warrant a finding of guilty to a reduced charge of Possession of Class D Controlled Substance and the matter was continued without a finding for six months. The remaining criminal charge OUI Liquor Second Offense was tried before a six person jury and the defendant was found not guilty.
Commonwealth v. #### ##### Worcester District Court, No. #### CR #####.
The Defendant was charged with a Domestic Assault and Battery in which his former wife and her new boyfriend, a Barre Police Officer, testified that defendant pushed the victim, pulled a dog crate from her hand and threw the crate across the parking lot. The defendant was arrested by Worcester police at the scene. The prosecution produced three witnesses and the defendant called one witnesses and testified himself. The jury deliberated less than fifteen minutes before finding the defendant not guilty.
Commonwealth v. #### ######; Westborough District Court Docket No. ######CR####
The Defendant was charged with OUI-Liquor OR .08%. At the time of the incident, the defendant was a municipal employee operating a town vehicle. He was involved in a single vehicle accident at 1:40 a.m. while he was on-call in the municipal truck. The truck he was operating crashed into the Jersey barriers, causing major damage to the vehicle. The plow hitch on the front of the truck was wedged between the Jersey barrier and the truck could not be removed without a tow truck. The Defendant failed all sobriety tests and admitted to drinking. Two police officers and a civilian witness testified against the defendant. The cross-examination was so effective that the case ended when the Judge allowed the Defendant's motion for a required finding of not guilty at the close of the Commonwealth's case.
PERSONAL INJURY CASE RESULTS*
$545,000.00 Mediation Settlement.
Client was a passenger on a motorcycle which crashed as a result of the defendant's reckless driving. Rather than calling for emergency medical services the defendant took the client home and attempted to care for her injuries. The client was later diagnosed with, among other things, a bilateral inferior and superior rami fracture; bladder rupture; right distal femur fracture, right tibia plateau fracture; L3-L4 transverse process fracture; serosal tear; right pelvic fracture; small right pneumothorax; and multiple abrasions. The case settled for the motorcycle policy limits of $20,000.00 with a contribution of $525,000.00 from the defendant's homeowner's insurance policy.
$225,000.00 Medical Malpractice Settlement
Emergency Room doctor deviated from the accepted standard of care in his care and treatment of our client, when he failed to properly diagnose and render adequate treatment for injuries to the client's 4th and 5th CMC joints and hamate fracture. Due to the delay and misdiagnosis, client's CMC joints healed in a mal-aligned position. With the displaced joints, the early motion resulted in more damage to the joints and earlier deterioration of the joint surfaces. This lack of adequate treatment from the outset prevented client from ever having the opportunity to heal correctly and, eventually required more extensive surgery.
$160,000.00 Soft Tissue Mediation Settlement
Clients, husband and wife, were struck in a head on collision by a drunk driver. Passenger suffered a tempromandibular joint (TMJ) injury, cervical pain and elbow pain. Driver suffered cervical pain, thoracic pain, lumbosacral pain and left shoulder pain. Each client received $80,000.00, prior to trial and after mediation in the Worcester Superior Court.
$122,000.00 Arbitration Award
Client involved in an auto accident with elderly driver. Client struck his head on the steering wheel of his car causing a subdural hematoma which was drained through surgery. Client claimed he suffered from a traumatic brain injury resulting in permanent persistent physical and cognitive deficits.
$100,000.00** Settlement of Auto Policy Limits
Client was a passenger in a car driven by his underage friend who was intoxicated and crashed into a tree. Client suffered acetabular (hip) fracture, lung contusion and fractured spine described as a "severely comminuted burst fracture of L4 with a large fragment within the spinal canal, narrowing it by more than 60% and a displaced fracture line in the right lamina of L4 extending into the spinous process" for which he underwent a surgical procedure called Posterior Spinal Fusion of L3 to L5 in which bilateral screws were inserted and a bone graft was performed. He also suffered a "whiplash" injury to his neck, back and shoulders. **(Social Host Liability matter currently pending against homeowner who supplied alcohol).
$100,000.00 Policy Limit Settlement
Client killed when his car was struck by a pickup truck that had run a red light at an intersection in Auburn, Massachusetts.
$100,000.00 Policy Limit Settlement
Client killed when struck by car in crosswalk in Amherst, Massachusetts.
$90,000.00 Dog Bite Settlement
Client suffered amputation of his dominant hand's pinky finger beyond the first digit, multiple puncture wounds, associated deep structure injury and emotional distress after attack by neighbor's dog.
$65,000.00 Dog Bite Settlement
12 year old girl bitten in face by dog requiring seven stitches to the left cheek.
$45,000.00 Settlement
Pedestrian backed into in parking lot of restaurant resulting in Humeral fracture, dislocated shoulder and loss of consciousness.
$42,000.00 Settlement
Client's motor vehicle struck by elderly driver resulting on "bucket-handle" tear of the medial meniscus.
