Gun/Firearms Crimes

19 Year Old Indicted for August 2009 Murder at Dorchester’s YMCA

Published on: June 5, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

A Suffolk County Grand Jury this past week returned indictments of Murder against Sherman Badgett, 19, related to the shooting death of Aaron Brown at the YMCA in Dorchester last August.

Badgett is alleged to have shot Aaron Brown, 19 at the time, in the head outside a teen dance at the Dorchester YMCA on Washington Street. He was indicted for Murder and Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, and is currently held without bail.

Boston Criminal Lawyer Lefteris K. Travayiakis is an experienced criminal defense lawyer handling all major felony charges, including Murder and Gun / Firearms Crimes.

Two Boston Men Arraigned for Murder of 14 Year Old Youth in Dorchester

Published on: June 1, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

Cristostomo Lopes, 20, and Joshua Fernandes, 16, were arraigned this morning in the Dorchester Division of the Boston Municipal Court in connection with the Sunday Murder of 14 year old Nicholas Fomby-Davis.

At their arraignment, Suffolk County prosecutors alleged that Lopes and Fernandes both jumped Fomby-Davis on Bowdoin Street as he rode his motor scooter. Once off the scooter, prosecutors allege that Lopes held Fomby-Davis while Fernandes fired 3 shots at him, one striking him in the chest.

Immediately following the shooting, a Boston Police Officer happened to be driving home and saw Lopes and Fernandes crouching between cars. The two were eventually apprehended after a chase by Boston Police Officers, and a .25 caliber gun believed to be the murder weapon was found underneath the car where Fernandes was allegedly seen kneeling beside.

Massachusetts Supreme Court Rules Police Need ‘Reasonable Suspicion’ to Conduct Pat Frisks

Published on: May 29, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

In reversing the Gun Crimes convictions of two men, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that police officers can no longer frisk someone during a routine encounter unless they have ‘reasonable suspicion’ to believe the person is involved in criminal activity and is armed and dangerous.

In the case of Commonwealth v. Jamal Martin, that defendant had been convicted of Carrying a Firearm Without a License, Carrying a Loaded Firearm, and Assault & Battery on a Police Officer. The incident occurred on October 8, 2006, when, at 10:30 a.m., Boston Police Officers were patrolling a ‘high crime area’ in which ‘numerous shootings’ had occurred and looking for a specific juvenile to execute an arrest warrant. During their patrol, they observed a young man wearing a sweatshirt with the hood up around his face and walking in the opposite direction from which the police were traveling. Although the police could not see his face, they ‘thought’ that this person might have an outstanding default warrant…[how does that make sense when they couldn’t see his face?]

The police turned their cruiser around and engaged the young man, a teenager, in conversation. Although the police quickly realized this young man was not the person they were looking for, and simply because the young man refused to continue to speak with the police, they proceeded to ask him if he had any weapons. Despite that Martin responded that he did not, the police nonetheless continued to frisk them “for their safety.” The frisk revealed a loaded gun.

2nd Amendment Gun Laws Upheld by District Court

Published on: April 8, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

United States District Court Judge Ricardo M. Urbinia, in the Federal District Court of Columbia, recently applied the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller which created a constitutional right to have a gun.

In Heller, the United States Supreme Court rejected a government’s ban on handguns along with a separate requirement that guns in someones home be kept locked or disassembled. The Heller case marked the first time the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment as guaranteeing the right to have a firearm. The Supreme Court stated that “[a] ban on handgun possession in the home violate[d] the Second Amendment, as its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.”

The Supreme Court did go on to say, however, that some form of gun control or regulation could still be valid despite the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms.

Massachusetts Supreme Court Rejects Challenge for Gun Rights

Published on: March 31, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

In the case of Commonwealth v. Jason Loadholt, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled on whether a defendant’s criminal prosecution for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition is violative of a person’s ‘right to bear arms’ as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In his appeal to the SJC for his Gun/Firearms Charges, the defendant claimed that Massachusetts could not prosecute him for the various gun and ammunitions charges for not first having obtained a Firearms Identification Card because the United States Constitution guaranteed him, via the Second Amendment, his ‘Right to Bear Arms’.

In rejecting the defendant’s Constitutional claims in his appeal, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reasoned, citing United States v. Cruikshank, that the Second Amendment “does not by its own force apply to anyone other than the Federal Government.” Rather, the Second Amendment means that it shall not be infringed any further by Congress, as opposed to the States. The Court explained that the Second Amendment “is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government.”

Massachusetts Supreme Court Rules Homeless Shelters Entitled to 4th Amendment Privacy Protections

Published on: March 25, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s recent decision of Commonwealth v. Porter P., a juvenile, focused on whether a person temporarily staying in room in a homeless transitional center is entitled to a ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ against unlawful searches and searches. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in a 5-2 decision, ruled that they do!

By way of background, the juvenile defendant and his mother had moved into a room at the Roxbury Multi-Service Center Family House Shelter in March 2006, which provides temporary housing for homeless families and assists them towards securing a permanent home. A few months later, the shelter’s director heard rumors that the juvenile defendant had a gun and then contacted the Boston Police Department. The next morning, five Boston Police Officers arrived at the shelter, and with the permission from the Roxbury shelter’s directors, searched the juvenile’s room and found a .40 caliber Glock firearm. The juvenile was immediately arrested for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm; Unlawful Possession of Ammunition; and Delinquency.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in ruling for the juvenile defendant, found that

“the room that the juvenile and his mother shared at the shelter was a transitional living space, but it was nonetheless their home…”.

As a result, they had a reasonable expectation of privacy in their ‘home’ at the shelter, and the Boston Police Officers’ search, without a warrant or consent by them, was violative of their 4th Amendment Right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Former Harvard Student Charged with Cambridge Murder

Published on: March 17, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

Brittney Smith, 22, was recently indicted by the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office in connection with the murder of 21 year old Justin Cosby, of Cambridge. Smith, a former Harvard University student, will soon be arraigned in Middlesex Superior Court on several criminal charges, including Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, Accessory to Murder After the Fact, Willfully Misleading a Grand Jury Investigation, and Willfully Misleading a Police Officer.

According to reports, the Cambridge Police Department and Harvard University Police responded to a ‘shots fired’ call on May 18, 2009, at a Harvard College dorm. Upon their arrival, they found Justin Cosby had left the dorm and ran to the intersection of Dunster and Mount Auburn Street, where he collapsed from a gunshot wound to the abdomen.

Based on the criminal investigation by the Massachusetts State Police, Cambridge Police, Harvard University Police and the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office, it is alleged that three men from New York arranged to meet Cosby with the goal of robbing him. The meeting took place inside the Kirkland House dorm, at which point several shot were fired.

Roslindale Man Held Without Bail in Jamaica Plain Tedeschi’s Murder

Published on: March 5, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

On March 3, 2010, Edward Corliss, 64 of Roslindale, was arraigned in Suffolk Superior Court and held without bail, charged with Armed Robbery While Masked, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, and the murder of Surendra Dangol while he was working at Tedeschi’s in Jamaica Plain on December 26.

The Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office alleges that Edward Corliss entered the Tedeschi’s at about 3:00 p.m., concealing his appearance with heavy clothing, a scarf and a wig. Store video surveillance captures Corliss allegedly pulling out a gun and pointing it at Dangol and ordering him to place the store’s cash into Corliss’ backpack. Dangol is then shown with his arms up, at which time Corliss pointed the gun at his chest and shot him.

Boston Police Investigators had also obtained video footage of the suspected vehicle Corliss got away in. After consulting with auto experts, a database search of the make and model of the vehicle was narrowed, leading police to Corliss’ home. The Plymouth Acclaim, registered to Corliss’ wife, was found in the back of the residence.

Massachusetts Supreme Court Reverses Gun Conviction for Constitutional Violation

Published on: February 26, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

A defendant who was convicted for the gun crimes of Carrying a Firearm Without a License and Carrying a Loaded Firearm recently had his convictions overturned because the admission of the Ballistics Certificate, without live expert testimony, violated his Right to Confrontation under the 6th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

At his criminal jury trial in the District Court, the prosecutor sought to prove that the gun at issue was an operable firearm with evidence consisting only of the Ballistics Certificate, which is simply a police ballistician’s certification that the firearm has been examined, tested and found to be functional. The ballistician who examined the firearm was not called as a witness by the prosecutor at trial, and therefore was not available to the defendant’s criminal defense lawyer for cross-examination. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that, because the ballistician was not made available to the defense for cross-examination of his findings, the defendant’s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him was violated. Read the full Massachusetts Supreme Court’s opinion in Commonwealth v. William Rivera.

The reversal of the defendants gun convictions follows the recent ruling in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, where the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the prosecution cannot prove its case with affidavits and without the benefit of live witness testimony. The case of Melendez-Diaz involved a drug trial where the prosecutor admitted a Certificate of Drug Analysis in lieu of the chemist’s testimony that the contraband seized by the police was, in fact, cocaine.

Boston U.S. Attorney’s Office Re-Opens 1993 Mail Bomb Investigation

Published on: February 25, 2010 | by Lefteris K. Travayiakis, Esq.

The Boston U.S. Attorney’s Office has reopened its investigation of the attempted mail bombing of Boston Children’s Hospital Dr. Paul Rosenberg. Amy Bishop, now charged with killing three other professors at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and shooting several others, along with her husband, James Anderson, are again named as suspects in that mail bombing.

In 1993, Dr. Paul Rosenberg received a package containing a bomb, but the package did not explode. The package was apparently sent shortly after Amy Bishop quit her job at Boston’s Children’s Hospital after a bad peer review by Dr. Rosenberg.

As previously reported in the Boston Criminal Lawyers Blog, in 1986, Amy Bishop was also questioned regarding the 1986 shooting and killing of her brother. She was not charged relative to that incident, authorities determining at the time that the shooting was accidental.