Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Women Accused of Counterfeiting Scheme in Plainville, Massachusetts

December 7, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

Two women from New York have been charged in a case of trying to use counterfeit bills to make purchases at Target stores in Plainville, North Attleboro, Seekonk and Connecticut.

Counterfeiting schemes could be considered larceny in Attleboro — a form of theft. In most cases, suspects use fake bills in order to make purchases. Many times, these cases can be difficult for police to discover unless the cashier checks the bills on the spot. However, counterfeiting can also be a federal crime investigated by the U.S. Secret Service.

Trying to piece together video footage and witness testimony after the fact and link a person to the crime can be a tricky proposition for the police. While the technology behind the government’s printing of dollars has gotten better in recent years, there are still people willing to try to literally print money.

For those who are arrested, an experienced Massachusetts defense attorney must be hired in order to investigate all the facts and look at the evidence police intend to use against the defendant. It may be possible, in some cases, for the evidence filed by police to be suppressed if rights were violated in the process. That happens only depending on the specific circumstances of the case, however.

In this case, The Sun-Chronicle reports, two woman were allegedly conducting a scheme where they would use counterfeit money to buy electronics at stores and then attempt to exchange them at other stores for the cash.

“They were doing some type of flim-flam, buying I-pods and I-pads at Target, using counterfeit money to buy them, and returning them to other Targets to get real money,” said Plainville Police Sgt. Scott Gallerani.

According to the newspaper’s report, several thousand dollars in counterfeit money were confiscated by officers. 24-year-old Iyanah Wright of Hempstead, New York, and 22-year-old Shannon Hoskins of Freeport, New York, have been arrested.

The newspaper reports that Wright was arrested after a foot pursuit in the parking lot of a Target store in Plainville. Hoskins was found by store security and held there. Both women now face charges of possession of counterfeit notes, receiving stolen property and conspiracy. Wright also faces a charge of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

According to police, detectives in Seekonk and North Attleboro are now investigating to see whether the women may be connected to alleged incidents there. Connecticut authorities may be, too. The women reportedly have open cases in New York of a similar situation.

There may also be a man who is involved as a “lookout” in connection with the incident. The women were set for an arraignment in Wrentham District Court.

Proving that the women knew the money to be counterfeited may be a challenge for police. The fact that they may have committed the crime in different areas has no bearing on these individual cases. If they are charged with committing the crime in Connecticut, an Attleboro jury likely won’t know that. They must determine guilt based on the incident that allegedly happened in that area. That may be tough in this case.
Continue Reading ›

Taunton Brothers Face Massachusetts Drugs Charges After Police Raid

November 21, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

The Taunton Daily Gazette reports that two brothers are facing guns and drug charges after a police raid.

Drug charges and gun charges in Taunton often go hand-in-hand.

Massachusetts criminal defense lawyers have defended many clients charged with both crimes. In the Commonwealth, drug charges can range from possession of a small amount of marijuana to being caught with larger amounts that can lead to trafficking charges.

In gun cases, possession of a gun without a firearm identification card can lead to mandatory jail time. Possession by a convicted felon or using a weapon while committing another crime are also serious offenses.

But there are many defenses to these two charges. Your defense lawyer must carefully review the facts and circumstances that led police to believe they were justified in filing such charges. If they relied on a search warrant to gain entry to a home, car or business to seek evidence, what was written in an affidavit must be scrutinized.

In many cases, a group of people can be riding in a car that gets pulled over by law enforcement. If there’s an illegal gun or drugs in the car, police will sometimes attempt to charge everyone. That’s simply not right and cases like that have been overturned and charged dropped because police don’t have the facts to back up such charges.

In this case, 19-year-old Adilson DaGraca-Teixeira and 21-year-old Jason DaGraca-Teixeira are charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute, conspiracy to violate drug laws, possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card and possession of a firearm without a firearms identification card. They are both being held without bond while they await a February 2 trial date.

On November 3, police raided their apartment at 56 Wales St. after they got a search warrant signed by a judge. Officers said they found heroine, oxycodone as well as a hidden compartment in the ceiling that contained ammunition and two handguns. The defendants’ sister, Melinda Teixeira, 18, was arrested as well as three other people. She is being charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute, being present where heroin is kept and conspiracy to violate drug laws.

Three other 19-year-olds — Alexander Torres Jr., of Brockton, Jeschalie Jimenez, of Providence and Darius Jones of Taunton face various drug possession charges.

These young people now face very serious drug charges that can have a profound effect on their future. But remember, it is the prosecution’s job to prove the charges, not the other way around. A defendant doesn’t have to say anything before a jury because the charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, not disproven.

There are defenses that must be considered for a person facing charges that are this serious. When the defendants are young and have a future ahead of them, the responsibility is even greater. Putting your faith in an experienced and aggressive Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer is the best course of action at the earliest possible stage in such cases.
Continue Reading ›

United States Supreme Court hears argument addressing whether GPS tracking violates the Fourth Amendment

November 17, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

The United States Supreme Court heard arguments in a case raising the issue of whether GPS monitoring violates an individuals Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Constitution. The case is United States v. Antoine Jones, and the filings from the case can be found on the Scotus Blog.

The criminal defense lawyers in the case allege that Jones’ Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures was violated when federal agents put a GPS tracking device on his car without his consent. The tracking resulted in the defendant being charged with federal drug charges. To read an excellent commentary on the case click here to read Shannon Bream’s Article for Fox News.

The case addressed the issue of whether a warrant must be obtained under the Fourth Amendment before the State can monitor someone through GPS surveillance. In the case, the police obtained a warrant to monitor the activity of defendant Jones; however, the warrant expired, meaning that no valid search warrant authorized the GPS monitoring. The federal agents in the case installed a GPS tracking device on the defendant’s car without his knowledge or consent.

Brawl in Taunton Broken Up By Off-Duty Police Officer results in Massachusetts Assault and Battery charges

November 15, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

An off-duty Mansfield police officer was credited with breaking up a daylight brawl between three men who had tire irons and a knife, the Taunton Daily Gazette is reporting.

Self-defense is one of the most commonly acknowledged theories of defense portrayed on television criminal shows and in novels. But in assault and battery charges in Attleboro, can also be a legitimate defense. In this case, the presence of weapons will complicate the defense and will likely enhance the charges faced by the defendants.

If someone is attacked, either with fists or weapons, they have a right to defend themselves. If you are arrested, the skills of an experienced Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer can aid in explaining this to a jury. Too often, police just make an arrest, regardless of who is right or wrong at the scene.

When violent acts take place, police can sometimes have a tough time sorting out the pieces. If the victim and suspect are both pointing fingers at each other, it can be independent witnesses, video surveillance or even physical evidence that can point to the truth. A skilled lawyer can get to the bottom of the case.

In this case, according to the newspaper, Michael Dutra, 56, and John Carveiro, 48, allegedly told police they thought Reginald Jenkins, 44, had stolen $50 they accidentally dropped outside a package store. When they realized the money was missing, they remembered seeing Jenkins reach down in the parking lot and pick something up, the police report states.

They drove around hoping to spot Jenkins and they found him walking in a nearby parking lot a few blocks away. They allegedly both got tire irons from their pickup truck and began swinging at Jenkins. He also got a tire iron from the pickup truck and tried to defend himself, but was hit in the head and arm. He was also stabbed in his back by someone carrying a knife.

Police say that an off-duty police officer from Mansifled, Jeffrey Danner, was driving nearby and saw the brawl as it took place. Once Jenkins hit the ground, Danner pulled up, exited his vehicle, pulled out his badge and a handgun and ordered them to stay put.

Carveiro was charged with two counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, two counts of carrying a dangerous weapon and one count of disorderly conduct.

Jenkins is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, disturbing the peace and disorderly conduct. The newspaper didn’t have details of the charges Dutra faces.

In this case, according to the newspaper and police reports, it appears clear that Jenkins was the victim and yet he faces charges. Had the other two men not allegedly stopped to start the fight, he wouldn’t have been involved. And after they grabbed weapons, he would have been foolish to stand by and allow them to beat him.

One can only hope that Jenkins gets an experienced and dedicated Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer to straighten things out with the prosecution in order to avoid any long-term consequences as a result of these charges.
Continue Reading ›

Legislation requiring prosecutors to consent to a bench trial in response to the Boston Globe special OUI report would be unconstitutional

November 13, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

In response to the Boston Globe Special Report on OUI bench trials in Massachusetts, the Globe reported that prosecutors are seeking legislation requiring prosecutors to consent to a bench trial. Assuming this report is accurate, this legislation would have to apply to every type of criminal case as legislation relating to criminal procedure cannot be crime specific. This legislation if proposed would be an unconstitutional violation of a defendant’s right to a fair trial under the Sixth Amendment.

The apparent aim of the legislation is to combat the perceived high rate of not guilty verdicts in Massachusetts OUI bench trials. This legislation would clearly be unconstitutional under the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment provides that a defendant in a criminal case enjoys certain rights: These rights include the right to a speedy trial and the defendant enjoys a right to a trial by jury. The use of the word “enjoys” in the Constitution provides strong textual support for the argument that a defendant can waive this right.

The right to a trial by jury was added to the Bill of Rights because the Framers of the Constitution feared that judges would not be impartial to defendants because their salary depended on the rule of the King. The original intent of the jury trial was to limit the power of Government and ensure that citizens judged citizens. The right to a jury trial is not Constitutionally required in all cases; in minor offense, with no possibility of jail time, there is no Constitutional right to a jury trial.

Comments on part II of Boston Globe’s special report on OUI bench trials

November 6, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

The Boston Globe published its second of three installments on drunk driving bench trials in Massachusetts. The Globe claimed to have researched the number of not guilty verdicts from selected judges that were targeted by prosecutors and published statistics of their rate of not guilty verdicts. Click here to read Part II of the Globe’s special report. This special report focused primarily on Plymouth County OUI cases but also targeted many of the same judges criticized in the first part of its report. To read my Blog regarding Part I of the special report, you can click here.

The Globe’s article is clearly motivated to further the political agenda of prosecutors. An example of this is that the Globe was critical of one Taunton District Court judge who finds that the lack of video tape evidence can be used against the Commonwealth when determining whether the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is satisfied. Instead, the Globe purports to adopt the reasoning of the State police that video is not used because it does not show the subtle signs of someone under the influence of alcohol.

While the Globe compared Massachusetts to other States in its rate of bench trial not guilty verdicts, the Globe did not consider that other police departments around the country routinely record not only the booking but have police cruiser camera. The suggestion that video should not be used because it may not be incriminating as the State police would like is clearly an attempt to keep relevant evidence from a judge or jury and keep control of the evidence in the hands of police officers. With video in OUI cases, there would be objective evidence, precluding officers from overstating and exaggerating conclusions that a motorist is under the influence of alcohol. Instead, without video, the only method to challenge an officer’s opinion is through cross examination.

Patriots Wide Receiver Edelman Charged with Sex Crime in Boston

November 5, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

New England Patriots wide receiver and special teams member Julian Edelman appeared in Boston Municipal Court recently to address charges that he groped a woman on a dance floor, the Boston Herald reports.

A Boston sex crimes lawyer has seen how allegations that appear innocent on the surface can lead to serious charges and tough penalties against a defendant.

Sex crimes in Boston not only can include the possibility of jail or prison time and probation. If convicted, a defendant could be forced to register as a sex offender. This means their photo, address, identifying marks such as tattoos and other information will be displayed on state and national websites. They must notify law enforcement where they’re moving from and where they’re moving to. If they don’t, they can be charged again.

A sex crimes conviction in Boston follows a person for life unless it is fought vigorously in the court system. Sadly, athletes and celebrities can sometimes be victimized because of their fame.

In Edelman’s case, he pleaded not guilty to a charge of indecent assault and battery. He is accused of reaching up a woman’s Halloween costume on the dance floor of a Back Bay nightclub.

A male witness said he watched the woman’s expression change on her face to “shock” after the player allegedly “grabbed her vagina,” a police report states. After the male witness threatened to “beat up” Edelman, he and the woman were kicked out of the club. Edelman was eventually removed from the club, but denied the allegations to police.

WEEI reports that Edelman said nothing during his initial court appearance. He was released on his own recognizance and ordered to stay away from the club and the alleged victim.

Edelman is a third-year player who was drafted in 2009 out of Kent State University. This season, he has three catches for 25 yards and 47 catches for 470 yards in his career. He has played mainly special teams for the Patriots this season, also returning kicks.

This appears to be a case of what will amount to a he said/she said situation, although there appears to be a witness who will testify for the state as well. It’s unclear whether the woman was flirting with Edelman before the alleged incident or if they were dancing close to each other before this allegedly happened.

Alcohol can sometimes be a factor and police must address that when they are called to a scene. If a person claiming to be a victim has been affected by alcohol and a night of drinking, investigators must consider that in deciding to file charges and it could influence a jury’s evaluation of the credibility of witnesses. This is common in cases of alleged domestic violence in Boston. When police arrive at a house, they sometimes assume the person considered the victim is telling the truth and the accused is lying.

But with sex crimes, the consequences are much more severe. Possible penalties are steep and the long-term impacts are great. Such charges must be fought aggressively.
Continue Reading ›

Bridgewater College Students Accused of Operating Drug Ring

November 2, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

The Enterprise News is reporting that four Bridgewater State students, two of whom are football players, are accused of operating a “drug house” operation off-campus.

Drug crimes in Bridgewater and throughout Massachusetts are serious charges as the government continues its war on drugs. Lawmakers have continually made penalties more extreme and in drug cases, police and prosecutors can often tack on many charges for a single episode.

In situations where investigators accuse people of operating a criminal enterprise out of their homes, Massachusetts criminal defense attorneys will look at fighting the legality of the search warrant. A search warrant is obtained by police officers and signed by a judge when they believe they have proof that a crime is going on inside a person’s house or business.

While detectives may be able to obtain a search warrant, take evidence from a house and file criminal charges, success in challenging a search warrant often leads to a reduction or dismissal of charges.

If detectives misled the judge who signed the warrant by providing false facts or if they didn’t quite know what they had at the time, a trial judge can nix the search warrant after the fact, which typically eliminates the evidence that was collected.

This is another reason to never make statements or admissions to police, as you never know what evidence will be in play at trial. If evidence is suppressed after motions by a defense attorney, but the defendant confessed, the prosecution could still attempt to go to trial. If there is no statement and no evidence, there is no case.

In the Bridgewater State case, Patrick McGirr, 20, of East Longmeadow, Tyler Trainor, 21, of Saugus, Eric Eldred, 21, of Methuen and Bradley Head, 21, of Ashby, were arrested. The state believes McGirr was the “ringleader” and he was held on $25,000 bail after an arraignment in Brockton District Court. Bail for the others was between $1,5000 and $2,500.

Police have alleged the group was selling drugs such as marijuana to cocaine and Perc30 out of their off-campus apartment. Police said they investigated for the last month before making the arrests.

Investigators stopped McGirr’s vehicle recently after obtaining a search warrant for it. Detectives said they found one ounce of marijuana and 10 Oxycodone pills inside a hidden compartment. Police then searched the apartment and allegedly found cocaine, Oxycodone pills, marijuana, $7,000, a heat sealer, digital scale and other evidence the police believe were related to drug dealing.

The news article doesn’t state why detectives searched the home after searching the vehicle. The Easton Journal reports that detectives had a search warrant for the apartment as well. The arrests were made by the WEB Task Force run by officers from Bridgewater, Bridgewater State University, East Bridgewater, West Bridgewater and Whitman.
Continue Reading ›

United States Supreme Court to address whether “a lost plea opportunity” can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment

October 31, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

The United States Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on October 31 2011 in the case of Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, that raises the issue of whether an a criminal defense attorney in Massachusetts, or any other state, can provide ineffective assistance of counsel during a plea negotiation when a defendant later receives a fair trial.

In the case of Cooper, he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney told him that he could not be convicted of assault with the intent to murder, because the shots he fired were below the victim’s waist. Based on this advice, Cooper claims that he went to trial and received a sentence eight years greater than the sentence he would have received had he accepted the original plea offer and was given proper advice as to the elements of the offense. To read the brief of Defendant Cooper you can click here.

In the Frye case, the defendant claimed he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney did not communicate a plea offer to him which expired; the defendant received a harsher sentence when he entered an open plea in court. Under the proposed plea offer, that was not communicated, the prosecutor offered to allow the defendant to plea to a misdemeanor with a ninety day jail sentence recommendation. The defendant ultimately received three years as part of an open plea but claimed prejudice in being deprived the opportunity to plea to the misdemeanor offense as a result of counsel ineffective assistance in not communicating the offer. You can read the filings in the Frye case by clicking here.

Boston Globe’s unfair attack on Massachusetts judges in drunk driving cases

October 30, 2011 | by Michael DelSignore

Massachusetts judges were unfairly attacked as being lenient on drunk driving charges in a recent Boston Globe report released today. The special report was the first of a three part series written by Marcella Bombardieri, Jonathan Saltzman and Thomas Farragher.

The Boston Globe claims that judges are lenient on Massachusetts OUI cases during bench trials. The article states that the Boston Globe looked through court records, listened to tapes of courtroom proceedings in order to make its assessment. While the Globe claims to have uncovered a widespread problem, as a Massachusetts OUI lawyer, I believe that the report presents an unfair attack on Massachusetts judges.

To obtain case names the Globe would have had to rely on prosecutors pointing out cases that they believe they should have never lost before a particular judge. Overlooked in this fact, is that often the police report does not tell the entire story of what happened during an arrest. Police officers do not always remember exactly what happened when writing the report and sometimes exaggerate, overstate and embellish in the police report. Further, judges are not reading the police report but are hearing the officer testify live and under oath.