Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

School Zone Violations in Massachusetts

Published on: January 2, 2014 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

Drug sale and distribution charges in Massachusetts can be treated more harshly based on factors other than the type and amount of drug in question. The context of the sale or distribution can make a big difference. For example, a “school zone violation” is a sentencing enhancement for people who commit drug crimes beyond mere possession. A school zone violation requires the court to impose a mandatory minimum term of incarceration that begins only upon the expiration of the sentence for the drug crime with which it is associated.

The recent appellate decision Commonwealth v. Bradley considered an amendment to the school zone violation law. The case arose when the police received a search warrant in 2010 to search the defendant’s dorm room, where they found marijuana. The dorm room was about 700 ft. from a preschool. Accordingly, the defendant was charged with possession of a class D substance with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of a preschool facility (a school zone violation.)

Two years later, the governor signed a bill that reduced the radius of the school zone from 1000 to 300 feet. The defendant’s case had not yet been adjudicated. He asked for his school zone violation to be dismissed, since his actions were committed 400 feet outside the school zone as described in the amendment. He argued that the change in the law should apply retroactively to cases that had not been decided before 2012.
Continue reading

The Lautenberg Amendment and Your Gun Ownership Rights in Massachusetts

Published on: December 25, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

In addition to some of the common criminal laws and statutes regarding the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, there is also a parallel system of federal laws which applies to all citizens living within any state in our nation.One such law that may be unknowingly violated is the Lautenberg Amendment of the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), which states that it is unlawful “for any person who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to … possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition.”

The issue of what sorts of domestic violence convictions count under this federal law was recently reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit, which is the federal court to which all Massachusetts district court cases are appealed.
Continue reading

U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Defendant in Mandatory Minimum Case Alleyne v. U.S.

Published on: December 19, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

In a very narrow plurality opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to overrule a decision reached just 11 years ago, in the name of protecting defendants’ Sixth Amendment rights.In the case, Alleyne v. US, 133 S. Ct. 2151, Sup. Ct. (2013), the Court examined the role of the jury and judge in proving elements versus enhancements for sentencing purposes.

In the case, Alleyne had been involved in a robbery involving a firearm. The underlying criminal statute stated that regarding sentencing, a conviction of the crime would result in a minimum of 5 years in prison. If a firearm was brandished during the commission of the crime, the minimum sentence would be bumped up to 7 years.
Continue reading

Court of Appeals Ruling Affirms Prior Conviction Record Insufficient to Establish Identity

Published on: December 11, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

On this blog, we often discuss how due to the serious nature of criminal offenses, the government bears the burden of proving all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. However, in certain cases, that is not the only burden of proof that the Commonwealth must bear. For example, as one Appeals Court decision affirms, in charging and sentencing based upon prior offenses, the prosecution must also prove that it was the same individual who committed the prior relevant offenses.In the case, Commonwealth v. Cruz, Mass. App. Ct. (2013), the defendant was subjected to a two part trial. In the initial phase of the trial, the jury convicted the defendant of operating under the influence of intoxicating liquor (OUI) and of negligent operation of a motor vehicle. In the second part, the jury convicted the defendant on the subsequent (third) offense portion of the operating under the influence charge. However, the defendant, Michelle Cruz, appealed on the later charge, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to establish that she was the individual who committed the two prior OUI offenses.

According to the opinion, the only evidence introduced by the Commonwealth to establish the defendant’s identity, was a certified copy of Michele MacCord’s 1993 OUI conviction and a certified copy of Michele Fortenbacher’s 2003 OUI conviction. Both of those conviction records reflected a birth date of March 17, 1962.
Continue reading

Massachusetts Appeals Court Affirms Requirement that Prosecution Must Prove All Elements Relating to Crimes For Which Jury Will Be Instructed at Trial

Published on: December 4, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

The Appeals Court of Massachusetts seated in Suffolk County handed down a decision earlier this year regarding a defendant who had been unlawfully indicted on a charge which the prosecution had not fully proven.In the case, Commonwealth v. Rodriguez, 83 Mass. App. Ct. 267 (2013), following a jury trial in Superior Court, the defendant was found guilty of rape aggravated by kidnapping; kidnapping aggravated by sexual assault; and indecent assault and battery. The judge sentenced him on the aggravated rape and indecent assault and battery charges, and placed the indictment for aggravated kidnapping on file, to which the defendant objected. The defendant’s appeal centered on the filed indictment. He argued that, the jury instruction setting forth the elements of aggravated kidnapping was erroneous.

Under the relevant portion of the statute, “[w]hoever commits any offense described in this section [the crime of kidnapping] while armed with a dangerous weapon and inflicts serious bodily injury thereby upon another person or who sexually assaults such person…” shall be found guilty of the crime. [emphasis added by court].
Continue reading

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Affirms Lower Sentence in Case Affected by Change in Mandatory Minimum Sentence Law

Published on: November 26, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts recently reached a decision regarding the application of mandatory minimum sentences to defendants who are caught in the middle of sentence reduction law changes.In the case, Commonwealth v. Galvin, Mass: Supreme Judicial Court 2013, the court examined the case of a defendant who was caught in the middle of changes made to G.L. c. 94C, § 32A (d) (§ 32A [d]), which was reduced effective August 2, 2012.

In the case, the defendant had allegedly committed the offense prior to the date that the law changed, but both his conviction and sentencing occurred after the change. The affect of the law was to lower the mandatory minimum sentence from five to 3 1/2 years.
Continue reading

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Decision Strikes Officer Testimony in OUI Cases

Published on: November 21, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

The Supreme Judicial Court issued an opinion earlier this month, that held the common practice of eliciting opinion testimony from police officers regarding impairment in OUI cases is not permissible as evidence.This case is noteworthy, because in practice, many prosecutors have developed a habit of simply asking officers their opinion regarding whether a driver was impaired at the time of the arrest, which the court held is a legal issue upon which a lay witness is not qualified to speak.

The case involved the stop of a driver in 2009. In addition to recanting facts regarding the circumstances of the driver’s field sobriety tests, the prosecutor asked the officer whether he had formed any opinions regarding the driver’s sobriety. To this, the officer replied, “I believed that his ability to drive was diminished.” This is testimony that the court held was impermissible, as it comes close to an opinion on the ultimate issue of guilt or innocence, in this case the standard for the OUI charge is whether “the defendant’s consumption of alcohol diminished the defendant’s ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.” Therefore, due to the well established law that “[n]o witness, including a police witness, may testify as to a defendant’s guilt or innocence,” this type of testimony is not allowed.
Continue reading

Arrest Made in Connection with Cambridge Break-ins

Published on: November 14, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

Cambridge police recently announced that they had made an arrest of a Boston man who was wanted on charges relating to two break-ins in Cambridge.State police and members of a U.S. Marshals task force seized cocaine, bath salts, oxycodone and more than $8,000 in cash. The man was arrested pursuant to an arrest warrant for the housebreaks.

In addition to the charges stemming from the warrant, the man was also charged with two counts of possession of a class B drug and trafficking of cocaine. These charges were based on police stating that they seized 18 grams of cocaine, nine ounces of “bath salts,” and 38 grams of oxycodone pills that had been packaged for distribution pursuant to the arrest. Police also reportedly seized drug paraphernalia, items believed to have been taken during break-ins, and more than $8,000 in cash.
Continue reading

Freetown Police Make Arrest After Finding Marijuana at Car Dealership

Published on: November 6, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

Freetown police responded to an alarm that was set off inside of a GM car dealership at 12:44 a.m. Saturday, and instead of encountering the potential intruders, discovered some 31 pounds of marijuana.When officers first arrived, they said they saw an open door, through which they entered, sweeping the store for intruders. While inside the dealership, officers noticed several large plastic bags on a shelf and bookcase, all of which contained marijuana.

Police then secured the building while one detective obtained a search warrant. The officers then seized the marijuana, and a camera system. After reviewing the video footage, officers saw two intruders, which they say can be seen running from the scene, carrying no items. Police questioned and then later arrested the owner of the dealership whom they suspect intended to distribute the drugs.
Continue reading

Massachusetts Motorcyclist Arrested for Reckless Driving

Published on: October 24, 2013 | by Patrick J. Murphy, Esq.

Massachusetts State Police announced that an arrest has been made in the case of a motorcyclist believed to have been traveling on highways around the greater Boston area at speeds in excess of 100 MPH, and using the breakdown lanes in order to evade police for several weeks.The 29 year old motorcyclist was recently arraigned on various charges, including reckless driving and speeding. An arrest was made on Tuesday morning, after the motorcyclist was found allegedly hiding behind a tractor-trailer in a parking lot in Randolph, just minutes after he was seen speeding along Route 24, where he was also reportedly making sudden lane changes, traveling in the median, and traveling south in a northbound lane.

A State Trooper reported that on a prior occasion, when he activated his lights, the driver flipped down his clear visor, and sped off at approximately 100 miles per hour. The motorcycle on which the man was riding had no license plates, and his helmet obscured his features. Another trooper reported a similar exchange, whereby the man reportedly took off onto the sidewalk, and then down the wrong side of the road. State Police reportedly posted information regarding the wanted motorcyclist on Facebook and Twitter, which led to a trucker informing police when he saw the motorcyclist behind his tractor trailer.
Continue reading