Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Making Closing Argument more Effective by Using Charts and Graphics

September 22, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

One of my passions as a lawyer is to become the best communicator I can be. I am interested in learning new communication methods, to become better at giving closing arguments. I offer these comments to share my knowledge on the issue.

In Closing argument, I want the jury to learn something about me or try to find different ways to regain the attention of the jury. One way to do this is with charts or personal stories.

I try to create an analogy about my family, often my daughter to tell a lesson in the case. In DUI cases, often the officer has a perception that everything is a sign of DUI. Cannot find your license, because you are under the influence, not because you are nervous or found it in 5 seconds instead of 2 as the officer thought you should. Cannot balance on one leg, it is the alcohol, not that you just do not have great balance. Sometimes perception is an issue. This is an opportunity to make this point with a story.

Connecting with Jurors Requires Stamina

September 13, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

As trial lawyers, we routinely cross examine police officers. Some officers have been questioned before and will gladly give us the response that we want. Its easy to quickly go through the cross examination and loss its full impact with the jury.

One of the best CD I have listened to is from John Maxwell, Everyone Communicates and Few Connect. In his lecture, he discusses how an actor performs the same play nightly and that every audience deserves a first time performance.

How do we make sure that a jury get the trial as if it were our 1st Trial, first time cross examining a police officer?

Massachusetts OUI Lawyers challenge the accuracy of the Breath Test Machine in upcoming Statewide Hearing in Concord District Court

September 1, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

Massachusetts OUI Defense lawyers will have the opportunity to challenge the accuracy and reliability of the breath test used in the State in a State wide hearing that will be heard in the Concord District Court.

The hearing has yet to be scheduled with a status conference coming up on September 17, 2015. The primary issues are anticipated to be the following:

Discovery issues regarding the out of calibration regarding the breath test that prompted numerous counties to stop using breath test evidence for several months throughout the summer.
Whether errors in the computer source code of the breath test 9510 make the machine unreliable scientifically.

OUI Drugs conviction overturned by Appeals Court in recent case

August 30, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

OUI drug charges can be difficult for the Commonwealth to prove. This was evident in the recent case of Commonwealth v. Sousa, decided last week. In this case the defendant was convicted of OUI drugs and negligent operation of a motor vehicle after a bench trial in the Malden District Court. Bench trials are very common for an OUI drugs charge given the technical nature of the evidence and defenses.

After the guilty verdict, this case was brought to the Appeals Court. The defendant had appealed his conviction because he had believed that the Commonwealth presented insufficient evidence that the defendant was, in fact, under the influence of a prohibited substance. In reaching its decision, the Court relied on the decision of Commonwealth v. Ferola, which also found that the Commonwealth must presented particular evidence as to the substance it is alleged that a defendant is under the influence of to support a conviction.

St. Paul Rape Case Features Text Messages as Key Evidence for the Defense

August 21, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

The Rape Trial of Owen Labrie began this week with opening statements and testimony of the complaining witness in the case.

In this Blog, I will review what I see as the strength of the Defense case and why I would expect the jury to find Owen not guilty on the Rape Charge.

The case revealed a disturbing culture at St. Paul Boarding, a New Hampshire prep school, which students referred to as a senior salute. The defense tried to downplay this culture, which ultimately is when older students attempt to ‘hook up’ with one freshman student before graduation, but it is clear that the school prompted a culture degrading to its younger female students.

Massachusetts SJC holds that a CWOF on an OUI counts as a conviction for CDL license holders

July 29, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

In a recent Massachusetts Supreme Court decision, Alfred Tirado v. Board of Appeal on Motor Vehicle Liability Policies and Bonds, the Court held that a continuance without a finding (CWOF) is a conviction funder G.L. c. 90F, section 1, which governs the licensure of commercial drivers. The decision essentially means that CDL holders who plea to an OUI will suffer the same license loss as those found guilty of the charge. The SJC’s decision in Tirado can be found here.

The case arose out of an Appeals Court decision vacating three Board of Appeals CDL suspensions where the drivers received CWOFs on OUI charges. The Appeals court held that a CWOF was not a conviction. The Board appealed and the Supreme Court overturned the Appeals Court’s decision. You can hear the oral arguments from the case on the Suffolk Law School Website.

What are the penalties in Massachusetts for leaving the scene of an accident?

July 24, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

What are the penalties for leaving the scene of an accident? This depends on whether the accident involved only property damage or personal injury. If only property damage is at issue, the case is easier to resolve.

In Massachusetts, anyone involved in a motor vehicle accident on a public road is required to stop and give his name, address, and car registration number to any other individual or vehicle operator involved in the collision.

If property is damaged in addition to the motor vehicles involved, or if people are injured in the collision, the operators are also required to give their information to the owner of the damaged property. Failure to do so can result in criminal charges, with hundreds to thousands of dollars in fines and years of confinement.

Supreme Court issues long-awaited Confrontation Clause ruling in Ohio v. Clark

June 21, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

In a unanimous decision reached by differing concurring opinions, the Supreme Court of the United States finally resolved the question left open by Crawford asking whether statements made to persons other than law enforcement trigger the Confrontation Clause. Publishing its decision in Ohio v. Clark today, the Court unanimously voted that statements made to a teacher at a school program by a child suffering from domestic abuse were not testimonial, and so not barred by the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.

The arguments before the court in this case were fierce, as the Court was poised to make a decision that would either limit a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to Confrontation or restrict prosecutions of countless cases involving child abuse. You can click here to view a thorough outline of the facts of this case, the arguments, and the relevant law, in a prior posting on my blog.

The Majority decided this case primarily on its unique set of facts in this case, rather than by issuing a categorical legal rule. The Court explained that the record clearly reflected that abused child’s statements were not made with the primary purpose of furthering a criminal investigation or prosecution. Instead, the child spoke with the teacher with the primary purpose of addressing an ongoing emergency, and the teacher’s questions were targeted at eliminating the threat to the child’s life. The Court noted that the conversation was informal and spontaneous, and that even the child’s age (4 years old) calls to question the possibility that the child could appreciate the use of his responses in a criminal investigation while merely responding to his teacher.

Massachusetts Court orders hearing on Reliability of Breath Test Machine

June 13, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is requiring the Court to hold an evidentiary hearing on the reliability of the breath test device the Alcotest 7110. The SJC held that the trial judge’s decision not to hold an evidentiary hearing addressing challenges to the reliability of the machine was wrong. The SJC clearly stated that a defendant who makes a proper showing addressing the reliability of the breath test machine is entitled to a hearing. In other words, the Court stated that trial judges are not permitted to assume that the breath test machine is accurate merely because the legislature approves breath testing under the law, but that breath test is scientific evidence that the Court should hold a hearing to address challenges to its reliability.

The SJC indicated it would retain jurisdiction of the case and require a report within 90 days. It appears that the SJC will review any decision of the district court and address the three issues that it indicated were raised by the case.

The hearing in Com. v. Kirk Camblin, will address the following issues:

Improper Closing Argument results in New Trial in Domestic Assault and Battery Trial

May 26, 2015 | by Michael DelSignore

In the case of Commonwealth v. Alphonse, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals awarded a new trial based on the improper argument of the prosecutor. One of the more common grounds to appeal a criminal conviction is based on improper arguments during closing.

In this case, the prosecutor argued that the defendant had the opportunity to tailor his testimony because he was present during the testimony of all the witnesses and not sequestered like other witnesses. This argument was improper because a defendant is Constitutionally required to be present during all testimony and must be present to be afforded the right to confront and cross examine witnesses.

In this case, the Judge cautioned the prosecutor that the argument was improper and indicated to the jury his displeasure regarding that type of argument. Additionally, the judge did grant a directed verdict regarding one of the counts of the criminal complaint.