Boston Criminal Lawyers Blog
Published on:

perkins.jpgKendrick Perkins, former center for the Boston Celtics, was arrested early this morning in his hometown of Texas on Disorderly Conduct charges.

According to police, officers responded to a club where a large group of men was reported to be rowdy. Although the group of men that were with Perkins reportedly tried to calm him, he became angry and allegedly tried to start a fight.

In Massachusetts, the crime of Disorderly Conduct is punishable with a fine of up to $150 for a first time offender; and up to 6 months in jail for a subsequent offense. The law prohibiting Disorderly Conduct is intended to control that conduct which disturbs the public tranquility or is aimed to alarm or provoke others. Specifically, Disorderly Conduct prohibits the following acts or conduct:

  1. The use of force or violence;
  2. Threats involving the immediate use of force or violence;
  3. Tumultuous behavior that may cause a riotous commotion and excessively unreasonable noise so as to cause a public nuisance; and
  4. Any conduct creating a hazard to public safety or a physically offensive condition by an act that serves no legitimate purpose.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is available 24/7 for representation against all Massachusetts Misdemeanor and Major Felony Charges.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Criminal Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

Arlington pot bust.jpgJonathan M. Pore, of Arlington, was arrested on Massachusetts Drug Charges after Arlington Police found 111 marijuana plants in his home this week. Pore was arraigned this morning in Cambridge District Court and charged with Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance.

According to the Cambridge Police Department and the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office, the apartment allegedly belonging to Pore was searched yesterday and allegedly found to contain 111 marijuana plants, about 46 pounds, with a reported street value of over $120,000. Police also allegedly seized $6,300 and 3 scales.

It’s unclear whether Jonathan Pore was present when the apartment was searched; whether there were any other occupants present and/or if anyone else resides in the home; nor what led police to focus a drug investigation on Pore and/or the apartment.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis has extensive experience in defending persons charged with Massachusetts Drug Crimes, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Massachusetts Drug Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

Pernell Powell, 73, of Boston, was arrested for allegedly plotting to kill a Worcester Assistant District Attorney.

According to federal prosecutors in Boston, Pernell Powell allegedly tried to hire his cellmate and offered him $4,000 to Murder the Worcester County ADA who was prosecuting his case because he was seeking a 4-6 year state prison sentence on his Massachusetts DUI Charges, Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol, 5th or Subsequent Offense.

Presumably, the cellmate then relayed the offer to authorities, who then arrested Pernell Powell following an investigation into the allegations. He is expected to be charged and prosecuted in Boston’s federal court.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is availalble 24/7 for consultation on all Massachusetts Felony Charges, including Murder.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

gps.jpegIn a recent case, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided that GPS monitoring or similar devices may not be added to a probationer as an additional condition of probation without a violation of probation where there is no material change to the defendant’s circumstances.

In the Massachusetts court, probation is a legal resolution of a case that allows the defendant to be released, without incarceration, on the condition that he complies with certain conditions imposed by the sentencing judge. If, however, the defendant violates any of those conditions of probation, a judge may then revoke his probation and commit that person for up to the maximum sentence on the charge for which he was placed on probation.

Where, however, the defendant on probation has complied with his conditions of probation, a judge is then limited with modifying the terms and conditions of the persons probation [without a violation].

With regard to GPS monitoring that was not originally imposed, without a “material change” in the defendants circumstances such cannot be then imposed, as doing so would be “so punitive as to significantly increase the severity of the original probation.”

In other words, even where there is no violation of probation, the defendant’s conditions may be modified, but the modification may not be ‘drastic’ or ‘severe’ and must be in accordance with the underlying terms that were originally imposed and “consistent with the underlying basis for the modification”.

Additionally, specifically with regard to GPS monitoring, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has acknowledged that GPS monitoring and creating ‘exclusion zone’ restricting the defendant from entering severely on a person’s liberty so significantly that it may only be imposed after a finding of a violation of probation.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is available 24/7 for consultation on all Massachusetts Major Felony Crimes.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Criminal Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

A recent effort from Massachusetts state legislators and District Attorney’s Offices would put into law a bill that would require sex offenders to register their online names, including e-mail addresses, as well as their accounts on Twitter, Facebook and the like.

The proposed bill would apply to Level 3 Massachusetts Sex Offenders and is being anticipated to being heard later this month. Under the proposal, a failure to register online aliases would be a criminal offense, subjecting the offender to jail time.

The reasoning behind the proposal, according to those sponsoring the bill, is to provide law enforcement with another method of policing those sex offender deemed most ‘dangerous’ and likely to offend by the Massachusetts Sex Offender Registry Board.

Currently, Level 3 Sex Offenders must register with their local police department and the Massachusetts Sex Offender Registry Board annually. The registration includes the person disclosing his/her address; work address; if in school, the name of the school; and he/she is photographed and fingerprinted. By law, police districts across the state must share the registration information of all Level 3 Sex Offenders residing or working in their community.

The proposed law does have some precedent, although does not appear to go as far as laws in some other states, which actually prohibit and make it illegal for sex offenders to even have any social networking accounts at all.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis has experience in defending persons against Massachusetts Sex Crimes, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Sex Crimes Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently decided the case of John Doe vs. Police Commissioner of Boston, ruling on the issue of whether a 2006 state law barring sex offenders from living in nursing homes or similar long term care facilities was constitutional. The Court ruled that it was not.

By way of background, the 2006 law passed by the Massachusetts state legislature barred Level 3 Sex Offenders from living in nursing homes, infirmaries or other homes for the elderly or developmentally disabled. Sex offenders who lived in such facilities in violation of the law were then punished with imprisonment, ranging from 30 days up to 5 years for subsequent violations.

In this case, “John Doe” had been previously convicted of Massachusetts Sex Crimes, and the Sex Offender Registry Board argued that, even at his age of 65, his criminal history and suggested a “high risk of re-offense and high degree of danger.”

In the case of John Doe vs. Police Commissioner of Boston, the plaintiff in that case was a Level 3 Sex Offender who, had he been deprived the opportunity to reside in a nursing home or similar facility, would have ended up homeless.

In declaring this law unconstitutional, the Massachusetts Supreme Court reasoned that the law “presumes that all members of a class of sex offenders are dangerous to every community of rest home residents…[and] affords no opportunity for [the sex offender] to demonstrate that he represents no or a minimal danger to the community the law is intended to protect and makes no provision for the necessary balancing of the plaintiffs interest in protecting vulnerable elders from sexual assault.”

Now, the Massachusetts Supreme Court has ruled, sex offenders should be provided a hearing to rebut the presumption that he/she poses no or minimal risk to the community; and if denied the opportunity to reside in such a permanent facility, whether the person will likely become homeless and expose himself to harm.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis has experience in representing persons charged with Massachusetts Sex Crimes, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Sex Crimes Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

brighton shooting.jpgRandy Moore, 54, was arraigned this morning in Brighton District Court on Massachusetts Murder Charges following the shooting of his 76 year old neighbor and standoff with Boston Police. Moore was charged with First Degree Murder and Armed Assault with Intent to Murder.

According to the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office, Randy Moore allegedly shot his 76 year old neighbor at 10:30 yesterday morning at the John J. Carroll Housing Development in Brighton where the two men lived. When Boston Police responded to the scene, Moore had reportedly barricaded himself in the building. He eventually surrendered, but not before allegedly also firing shots at responding Boston Police Officers and EMT’s who were on scene.

At this time, Boston Police have not revealed any apparent motive for the shooting, and are unclear if Randy Moore even knew the victim.

According to the Boston Housing Authority which oversees the John J. Carroll Housing Development, Randy Moore had reportedly been diagnosed as a schizophrenic and had lived in the housing under as a disabled resident for several years. Boston Police also reported that, notwithstanding any mental health issues Moore may have suffered from, that he was legally licensed to possess firearms.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is available 24/7 for consultation on all Massachusetts Crimes of Violence Charges, including Murder and Gun Crimes Charges.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Criminal Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

Emily McCarthy, a bartender at Paddy Barry’s Bar in Quincy, was arrested last week on Massachusetts Drug Charges after she allegedly sold pills during her shift. She was arraigned in Quincy District Court on the charge of Possession with Intent to Distribute Drugs.

According to the Quincy Police Department, an officer working a detail on Hancock Street allegedly observed Emily McCarthy engage in a suspect drug transaction with a truck that had pulled up to the bar. Although the officer apparently admitted not seeing what, specifically, was exchanged, based on his ‘training and experience’, he believed that a drug sale had just occurred.

After the truck left, the officer requested other officers to stop the truck and during questioning about the meeting with McCarthy, the driver, John Saturno of Milton, allegedly told police that he had lent McCarthy $40. The Quincy Police, however, searched the truck and allegedly seized 100 pills of Gabapentin. Meanwhile, Emily McCarthy was approached by officers as well. She was searched and from her person police allegedly seized 12 oxycodone pills.

Based on this information, it is very apparent that officers had no reasonable suspicion or probable cause whatsoever to believe that a drug transaction had occurred. There was therefore no constitutional basis for the officer to justify any stop and search of any of the parties involved. The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that ever person be free from warrantless searches and seizures without the requisite level of suspicion.

Accordingly, it appears that all parties who were arrested in this case have tremendously strong issues in support of challenging the Search & Seizure and the Quincy Police Department’s actions in this case. If successfully on such a constitutional challenge to a violation of their rights, all the evidence in this case should be ‘suppressed’ or thrown out.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is has successfully defended persons charged with Massachusetts Drug Crimes, including Possession With Intent to Distribute Drugs, Distribution of Drugs, and Drug Trafficking, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Drug Crimes Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

Paul Baran was arraigned this morning in Taunton District Court on Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Crimes for allegedly striking and killing a teenager riding his skateboard last week. Baran was a charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident After Causing Death.

According to prosecutors, Paul Baran allegedly left the scene of the accident after he struck teenager Nicholas Silva-Thomas in Tauton, who was riding his skateboard with friends near Watson Pond last Thursday night.

At his arraignment, prosecutors represented that ‘a tip’ led the police to focus their investigation on Baran. Prosecutors argued that the police investigation revealed that Baran’s vehicle was missing its windshield, and there was visible damage to the front end of his car.

In Massachusetts, the crime of Leaving the Scene of an Accident After Causing Death is punishable in jail for not less than 1 year and up to 2.5 years; or commitment to state prison for not less than 2.5 years and up to 10 years.

The purpose of this crime is obviously to impose punishment to persons who fail to identify themselves as responsible for accidents that result in death. Massachusetts law, therefore, imposes an active duty upon the driver to immediately stop at the scene and provide detailed information concerning his/her identity.

Following his arraignment in Taunton District Court this morning, Paul Baran was held on $100,000 cash bail.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis has experience in defending persons against Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Crimes, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Criminal Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.

Published on:

gun.jpgAshawda Nelson, 19, and Noccokawon Pledger-Grant, 21, both of Dorchester, were arrested this past week on Massachusetts Gun Charges following a ‘shots fired’ report. Both men where charged with Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, Unlawful Possession of Ammunition, Carrying a Loaded Firearm, and Discharging a Firearm with 500 feet of a Dwelling.

According to the Boston Police Department, officers responded to the area of Auckland Street in Dorchester on a report of shots having been fired. The two men were reportedly observed running in the direction of the Savin Hill MBTA Station when they were apprehended. During a search of one of the men, a firearm was allegedly recovered on his person.

Despite that a gun was reportedly seized from one of the men, this strength of the prosecutions case against these men will rise and fall on whether the officers had sufficient probable to immediately arrest these men. In similar types of cases, the police will inevitably rely on witness reports and the purported identification of the men. In circumstances where the description of the purported suspects is in question, the defense may have ample grounds to challenge the constitutionality of their arrest by litigating a Motion to Suppress Evidence.

In Search and Seizure cases where the constitutionality of the seizure and arrest of the person is successfully challenged, the evidence seized, in this case the firearm and ammunition, will be deemed ‘suppressed’ or inadmissible. If that were to happen in this case, the prosecution would presumably have no evidence against them and would be unable to move forward in its prosecution against them.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis has experience in defending persons against Massachusetts Gun Crimes Charges, and is available 24/7 for consultation.

To schedule a Free Consultation, Click Here to Contact a Boston Gun Crimes Lawyer or call 617-325-9500.

Attorney Lefteris K. Travayiakis may also be reached at lefteris@travayiakis.com.