Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

41 Alleged Boston Gang Members Charged in Serious Federal Crackdown

In February of 2024, a total of 41 alleged gang members in Boston were charged with a wide range of offenses, including racketeering, drug trafficking, firearms violations, and fraud. If these are indeed Heath Street Gang members, this crackdown has taken almost 33% of its workforce off the streets. This is apparently the culmination of a two-year investigation into the gang carried out by various law enforcement agencies, including Homeland Security, the Department of Labor, the IRS, the Massachusetts State Police, the US Department of Agriculture, the US Secret Service, the US Postale Inspection Service, the DEA, and the OCDETF.  

What is the Heath Street Gang?

According to the Department of Justice, the Heath Street Gang is a decades-old criminal enterprise originally formed in the 1980s. It has its roots in various housing projects in the Jamaica Plain area, and law enforcement considers it to be one of the most dangerous gangs in Boston. It has notable rivalries with the Mission Hill Gang and the H-Block Gang, and the DOJ accuses it of carrying out various shootings to “preserve and protect” its “power, territory, and reputation.” Some of these shootings reportedly killed children in the crossfire, attracting serious attention from law enforcement.  

A Surprising Number of White-Collar Crimes

Although the gang attracted attention from law enforcement due to its alleged brazen shootings, it is also accused of carrying out numerous additional offenses – including white-collar crimes. The DOJ states that some of the 41 defendants have been charged with non-violent crimes, such as COVID-19 fraud. One defendant was accused of carrying out unemployment fraud in 10 different states – plus the territory of Guam. He was not the only associate to face such charges, and the DOJ accuses various members of “widespread CARES Act loan and unemployment fraud.” 

Organized Smash-and-Grabs

In addition, the DOJ points to what it calls “organized retail theft.” In other words, the gang allegedly facilitated large-scale shoplifting of major retailers in Boston. Combined with the various unemployment fraud activities, these activities apparently allowed the gang to generate about $900,000. The DOJ accuses them of using these funds to purchase over 100 firearms.  

Violence Involving Juveniles

While the aforementioned white-collar crimes are certainly worth mentioning, they are probably byproducts of in-depth investigations triggered by alleged violence involving minors. Both victims and perpetrators in many of these incidents were juveniles, and the Heath Street Gang is accused of recruiting minors in Jamaica Plain while encouraging them to carry out various acts of violence. In addition, many of the victims were juveniles – including those caught in the crossfire. 

Music Videos May Be Used as Evidence

Music videos may find their way into some of these criminal trials, as various gang members openly bragged about their crimes and posted these admissions on YouTube. In addition, juveniles were reportedly rewarded with cameos in some of these music videos, apparently providing law enforcement with a clear picture of who carried out various acts. 

Shootings at the Caribbean Music Festival in Dorchester: Are Police Reacting Fairly?

It seems that with each passing year, there is some kind of shooting incident at the Caribbean Music Festival in Dorchester. Last year, a shooting resulted in eight people suffering nonfatal gunshot wounds. The police’s reaction to this event and similar shootings should come under close scrutiny. Due to the popularity of the festival, authorities are under immense pressure to react in a decisive manner. However, the high-stakes nature of this case may lead to numerous criminal justice concerns.  

Four Men Face Charges for Caribbean Music Festival Shooting

On February 1, four men were officially charged for their roles in the shooting at the Caribbean Music Festival in August of 2023. The attack in Dorchester left eight people with non-life-threatening gunshot wounds. Officers arrested two of the defendants shortly after the festival, recovering illegally-modified handguns from them. However, officers seem to have arrested many other individuals in a somewhat indiscriminate fashion after the festival – perhaps with the intention of catching anyone who could have possibly been involved. One can only assume that many of these individuals were subsequently released without further consequences. 

The circumstances in which the other two defendants were arrested are unclear. Earlier reports only spoke of three arrests made in connection with the shooting. However, the charges filed in February of 2024 indicate a fourth individual. There is no word on how this additional suspect became involved in the investigation. Piecing together the scraps of information, we can assume that the first two individuals were arrested at the music festival. The third was arrested shortly thereafter, while the fourth seems to have been arrested late in the investigatory process. 

Police also suggest that this group of four defendants represents two factions allegedly firing at each other. However, it is not clear which defendants were friends or associates. It is worth noting, however, that while three defendants were charged with assault, the fourth only faced penalties related to illegal firearm possession. This individual was one of the two arrested at the scene of the music festival. 

Points for Discussion

While it is easy to make assumptions about the Caribbean Music Festival, the truth is that the potential for violence increases with all large outdoor events. The addition of a fourth suspect late into the investigation also poses important questions. What new evidence led to the arrest? Could it have been statements extracted from the other three defendants? What kind of pressure did they face to give up the name of a fourth individual – and can this testimony even be trusted? 

Find a Qualified Firearm Shooting Charges Lawyer in Boston

Due to continuous shootings during festivals and other events in Boston, defendants facing gun charges may struggle with an unfair level of pressure from prosecutors. Problems with due process and criminal justice are real concerns in this situation, and defendants should fight for their rights alongside the most qualified, experienced firearm shooting charges lawyer they can find. Choose Edward R. Molari to get started with an effective defense strategy today. 

What Exactly IS the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force?

Also known simply as the “OCDETF,” the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force plays an important role in numerous criminal cases across Massachusetts. However, many people may not understand this role, and some might not even be aware that this organization exists. Those who face investigations by this organization may face high-pressure, high-stakes criminal charges compared to others who commit similar but “lower-profile” crimes.  

The OCDETF Targets High-Profile Drug Offenders

The OCDETF offers to take high-profile cases off the hands of local or state police, and they tend to target cases that are easy to win. In exchange for “robbing them of their glory,” the OCDETF promises these local authorities to bring harsher penalties than the defendant would have otherwise received in state courts. The OCDETF can do this because it receives funding directly from the Department of Justice, and it can pursue charges through federal courts instead. It also has close ties to various federal agencies, such as the Drug Enforcement Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the United States Marshals Services.

In many ways, the OCDETF exists to make headlines. Because they can pick and choose cases across numerous states, they can easily select the most “winnable” cases. As a result, they can boast of accomplishments that would not normally be possible if they had no choice of which cases to accept. These include the seizure of billions in cash and tens of thousands of high-profile drug convictions.  

How Can the OCDETF Affect Criminal Cases in Massachusetts?

The OCDETF has the authority to direct investigative resources based on directions from prosecuting authorities in local Massachusetts courts. As a result, drug defendants in Massachusetts suddenly find themselves facing much higher levels of pressure whenever the OCDETF gets involved. The full scrutiny of numerous federal agencies may be brought to bear against relatively low-level dealers. With the possibility of facing excessive federal prison sentences, these defendants often agree to cooperate and provide evidence against the OCDETF’s real targets – the big-time traffickers who are much higher up on the ladder of drug crime networks. In exchange for this cooperation, the small-time dealers often receive reduced sentences. 

Two Recent Cases Involving the OCDETF

On January 23, 2024, the Justice Department reported that a Boston man had pleaded guilty to RICO conspiracy, trafficking charges, and possession of a firearm as a felon. His offense revolved around an assault in 2019. After his arrest by local police, 900 grams of cocaine, 500 grams of marijuana, a loaded handgun, and about $15,500 in cash were recovered in his possession. While one might argue that this is evidence of trafficking, this is clearly not a “high-level” dealer; the OCDETF’s involvement indicates that his guilty plea may have been due to his cooperation – possibly leading authorities to a higher-level trafficker. 

On January 19, it was reported that another Boston defendant had been sentenced to just over five years in prison for possession of two kilos of fentanyl. He was discovered in 2022 with a cereal box filled with fentanyl. This five-year sentence is quite low, considering that possessing even 10 grams of fentanyl can lead to 20 years in prison. This could be explained by the OCDETF’s involvement, suggesting that the defendant cooperated in exchange for a reduced sentence. 

District Court Judge in Massachusetts Says Carrying Guns Across State Lines Is Okay

Back in August of 2023, a District Court Judge in Massachusetts made a surprising decision. In a case that revolved around a New Hampshire man who attempted to carry a firearm without a proper license in Massachusetts, the judge dismissed the charges. Why? According to him, the state’s requirement that non-residents obtain temporary carry licenses is unconstitutional. While this case is notable, it’s important not to read too much into it. 

The Second Amendment Trumps Other Individually Held Rights

Judge Coffey wrote that a person cannot lose their right to bear arms under the Second Amendment simply by traveling into a different state. Anything else, the judge argued, would mean that an individual’s Second Amendment rights are handled differently compared to other rights. 

Back in June of 2022, the Supreme Court made a similar landmark decision in New York. These decisions seem to suggest that bringing a weapon across state lines is inherently acceptable under the Constitution – although it is important to remember that the Massachusetts decision was only issued by a District Court. As a result, it does not “set a precedent” in the same way as a Supreme Court decision.

Nonetheless, this is part of an apparent trend toward what some call “national reciprocity” – the idea that every US citizen has the right to travel across all 50 states while carrying firearms in public. Note that the penalties for carrying firearms across state lines without proper permits can be quite severe. The aforementioned New Hampshire resident was facing 18 months in prison for his offense. 

This decision also involves the distinction between a “privilege” to bear arms and a “right” to bear arms. The Supreme Court decision in June of 2022 established that the constitutional right to bear arms is a right and not a privilege – and the court used the term “second-class right” in this context. This suggests that Second Amendment rights should be prioritized over other rights - which is exactly what Judge Coffey was getting at when he made his 2023 decision. 

Does This Decision Even Matter?

While this decision is interesting, it does not serve as a precedent – at least not yet. The Commonwealth has already filed an appeal – and this means that it could eventually become a precedent at a later date. Specifically, the Court of Appeals may issue a decision – or it might even go to the Supreme Judicial Court for review. When and if this happens, Coffey’s decision could very well set a precedent – pushing gun rights even further across the entire nation. 

Get in Touch With a Firearms Defense Attorney Today

If you are facing charges for carrying a firearm across state lines, consider booking a consultation with a qualified defense attorney in Massachusetts. With help from Edward R. Modlari, you can push back against excessive penalties and fight for your Second Amendment rights. Book your consultation today to get started with an effective defense strategy. 

Why Some Defendants Suddenly Have More Leverage On the Commonwealth

The elimination of life without parole for murder defendants between the ages of 18 and 20 will have significant effects on the criminal justice system in Massachusetts. Specifically, it means that the Commonwealth now has less leverage over defendants within this age bracket as they approach a major choice: Pleading guilty or heading to trial. While this choice is important for virtually any defendant, the stakes are obviously much higher if a defendant stands to lose any hope of ever being released. The exact effects of this change in the criminal justice system are somewhat nuanced.  

Commonwealth vs. Sheldon Mattis

In January of 2024, the Commonwealth confirmed that mandatory life imprisonment without parole is unconstitutional for juveniles. Referring to a previous case in 2013 (Diatchenko I), the Supreme Judicial Court found that this protection against mandatory life imprisonment should extend to “emerging adults.” The court defines emerging adults as those who were 18, 19, or 20 at the time they committed their crimes. In Commonwealth vs. Sheldon Mattis, the defendant successfully challenged the constitutionality of his sentence of life without parole, and this argument was successful. 

The case revolves around a shooting incident that occurred at a parking lot. While the defendant did not pull the trigger, he was accused of handing his codefendant a weapon and telling him to “handle that” – referring to the presence of two individuals nearby. One victim survived the shooting, while the other succumbed to their wounds. Part of the trial was devoted to the subject of neurological development among teens, and it included testimony from medical experts. 

The issue at hand was whether "emerging adults" are capable of making informed decisions due to their brain development process and whether this should represent a mitigating factor for criminal offenses such as murder. The defendant was 18 at the time of the shooting. Ultimately, the defense counsel’s arguments proved was rejected by the trial court, and the defendant was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the sentence violated constitutional prohibitions on cruel or unusual punishments. 

However, the courts denied all of these efforts and upheld the sentence. In the following years, however, the subject of neurological development among teens continued to take center stage, with a different Superior Court judge stating that emerging adults are “less able to control their impulses.”

What This Decision Means

Before this case, an "emerging adult" was forced to choose between a trial and a plea deal. The trial came with significant risks, as there was a serious chance of never being released. On the other hand, a plea deal guarantees at least the possibility of release. Now, the prospect of life without parole has been eliminated – giving defendants more autonomy to make a choice that aligns with their values and priorities.

Some speculate that some day the SJC may decide to extend the rule against life without parole to adults. It seems unlikely to happen in our lifetime, but it is cerainly possible. in particular, the SJC in this case decided to take the statute fixing a term for parole between 20 and 30 years. It could have, instead, found unconstitutional the provision making life without parole mandatory, and thereby allowed people to be sentenced to life without parole but making the choice discretionary. This is how it works for juveniles in many states, and may be the next reform that Massachusetts sees towards the elimination of life without the possibility of parole.

Insane String of Legal Decisions Pulls Brockton Man in and Out of Prison

On December 21, 2023, it was reported that a Brockton man had been arraigned on a murder charge. This isn’t particularly out of the ordinary, as Brockton is “not one of the safest communities in America,” according to NeighborhoodScout.com. However, when one looks into this case in more detail, it is anything but ordinary.  

Brockton Man Spends Four Months Out of Prison Before Being Accused of Murder

This individual had apparently experienced just four months of freedom before new murder charges, having previously been sentenced to nine years for involuntary manslaughter and firearms offenses back in 2021. These charges stemmed from a 2013 incident involving the death of an individual in Brockton. 

However, the defendant spent just a few years behind bars, as he received credit for time served. To complicate matters even further, he won an appeal in 2016 after initially being charged with manslaughter. As a result of this appeal, his convictions for manslaughter and firearms offenses were reversed by the Massachusetts Appeals Court in 2019. 

Why did the Appeals Court reverse the decision? Because the judge denied his motion to suppress the portion of his interrogation after he clearly stated he was “done answering questions.” The Appeals Court found that the defendant was exercising his right to remain silent and that the trial judge should have suppressed the later portion of the interrogation as requested. Although he was set for a new trial, the defendant eventually decided to plead guilty and was then sentenced in 2021. He spent about a year longer in prison before being released in early 2022. 

Four months later, he allegedly became involved in the fatal shooting of another Brockton resident. Police say that after an investigation, they obtained an arrest warrant for the defendant. He was eventually taken into custody and charged with murder, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a building, possessing a firearm without a license, and possessing ammunition without a license. What happens next is anyone’s guess. 

Research this defendant’s history a little more, and you’ll find even more back-and-forth legal decisions. In 2009 – before his manslaughter incident – he was convicted of trafficking cocaine. One of the key witnesses in his trial was state drug lab chemist Annie Dookhan, who was later accused of mishandling 60,000 drug samples. Although the defendant was initially sentenced to five years in prison (minus time served), he walked out of prison in the wake of the drug lab scandal. The drug samples used to convict him had been destroyed by 2012, and his petition for a new trial led to his sentence being vacated. However, his freedom was short-lived – as he spent just six months on the outside before being incarcerated for the 2013 manslaughter incident. 

Due to this defendant’s incredible ability to escape serious terms in prison, it is difficult to predict with any accuracy whether these new charges will “stick.” 

How Did This Defendant Get an Acquittal After Stabbing Accusations?

In 2019, a 20-year-old was fatally stabbed multiple times in Brookline, Massachusetts – but the person arrested for this offense was eventually acquitted. The fatal incident took place at approximately 1:30 AM, and it apparently involved a dispute over prescription drugs. Very quickly, the defendant claimed that he was acting in self-defense. Over the next few years, a detailed account of this incident began to emerge.  

How the Story Changed Over the Years

Initially, media reports painted the deceased individual as a clear victim. They highlighted the fact that he was a student at a local educational institution and that he was missed by many students and teachers. What these reports failed to mention, however, was that the deceased individual was almost certainly caught up in some kind of altercation over prescription drugs. 

Eventually, the story began to change. Police found Snapchat messages that implicated the defendant and led to his arrest. However, the defendant’s counsel quickly began to paint a very different picture – one that suggested that the deceased individual might not have been the “innocent student” initially described by media reports. On the contrary, the defense maintained that this individual attacked the defendant with a broken vodka bottle in an attempt to steal two Xanax pills. The defense also suggested that the deceased individual was heavily intoxicated at the time of the altercation. 

In response, the prosecution argued that the deceased individual had suffered almost 20 stab wounds – and that this could not possibly be the result of someone acting in self-defense. Someone acting in self-defense would have stopped after incapacitating the attacker with just a few stabs, they argued. They also pointed to surveillance footage that showed the deceased victim stumbling in a drunken manner prior to the attack – suggesting that this individual couldn’t have posed a real threat. 

In the end, the jury determined that the defendant was probably acting in self-defense – and they acquitted him of all charges. The defense’s argument of “sudden, close-quarters combat” seemed to resonate with the jury, who understood that there was no time to react or consider any course of action besides self-preservation. At the end of the day, the defendant was clearly robbed by not one but two attackers. 

How Did He Escape Felony Murder Charges?

Some observers have asked why the defendant did not face felony murder charges. After all, he was allegedly committing a crime (selling drugs) when the fatal altercation occurred. In some cases, it is possible to face felony murder charges even if you cause someone to unintentionally or accidentally die while you are committing a crime. In this case, it seems that the right to self-defense trumped any implications of illegal drug dealing. In other words, the defendant’s right to self-defense did not disappear simply because he was selling Xanax under questionable circumstances. One has to wonder what would have happened if the defendant did not defend himself. Would a reasonable person allow themselves to be seriously injured or murdered with a broken vodka bottle?

Get in Touch with a Qualified Defense Attorney in Massachusetts

If you have been searching for a qualified, experienced defense attorney in Boston, consider booking a consultation with Edward R. Molari.

Criminal Court Chooses to Reverse a Decision to Dismiss Criminal Charges Against Ex-Boyfriend

Many defendants in Massachusetts face criminal charges after being accused of pestering their ex-girlfriends. These situations may be complicated further with the presence of new romantic partners. While the old saying “all’s fair in love and war” might ring true in many circles, the criminal courts are of a decidedly different opinion. These opinions, however, may fluctuate based on effective appeals from defense attorneys. This was demonstrated by a recent decision to dismiss criminal charges against an ex-boyfriend in Massachusetts. 

Why Did the Commonwealth Choose to Reverse a Decision to Dismiss a Criminal Complaint Against This Ex-Boyfriend? 

This case begins with a breakup between two adults who share a child. The ex-boyfriend later became a defendant accused of offenses related to alleged stalking. The girlfriend went on to start a new relationship with an individual who later accused the defendant of these offenses. Simply put, the victim became unsettled by the defendant’s various social media posts. The defendant also allegedly photographed the victim’s nearby vehicle after watching his child’s soccer game. 

Faced with these apparent issues, the victim went to a clerk magistrate and provided testimony. The magistrate believed that there was probable cause and issued a criminal complaint. The defendant immediately moved for a dismissal. 

A judge allowed the motion and agreed that probable cause had not been established. Perhaps most crucially, the judge did not even take into account the oral testimony that the victim had provided during the two prior show hearings. The District Attorney later wrote that this testimony should have been considered, and therefore, the decision was reversed. 

Some of the most notable details involve the nature of the social media posts made by the defendant, in which he describes the victim as a “beta male” who displays “weakness” and “cowers” behind females. He also posted what might have been interpreted as a threat: “I keep begging the universe not to push me.”

Facing these social media posts and alleged stalking, the victim and the ex-girlfriend allegedly became too afraid to leave their home – even after relocating to a new town. The defendant also claims that he suffered damage to his reputation after repeatedly being called a “child abuser” by the defendant on social media. It was alleged that the defendant made hundreds of social media posts targeting the defendant in the space of just 60 days. 

The defendant’s counsel asked the judge to consider only the victim’s application rather than any of the more detailed testimony that he had provided. Seeing limited objections from the assistant district attorney, the judge considered only the application and came to a decision quickly. In the judge’s opinion, the application had, in fact, failed to establish probable cause, and he dismissed the criminal complaint. 

The judge seemed to indicate that the social media posts were “protected speech” and were merely annoying rather than criminal in nature. However, the Commonwealth eventually reversed this decision and pointed out that the judge should have considered the oral testimony – and not just the application. 

Find a Qualified Criminal Defense Lawyer in Massachusetts

If you have been searching for a qualified criminal defense attorney in Massachusetts, look no further than Edward R. Molari. With our help, you can appeal various decisions by criminal courts for more favorable outcomes. Book your consultation today to get started. 

Rape Acquittal for Former Suffolk County District Attorney

On November 4, it was reported that Adam Foss had been acquitted of all rape and sexual abuse charges. The former Suffolk County District Attorney and criminal justice advocate is now exploring legal options to hold relevant parties accountable for making false allegations against him. His defense attorney painted a damning picture for the DA’s office in this case, accusing them of basing their entire strategy on flimsy social media evidence rather than actual proof. This story goes to show that until the defense has its day in court, it is important for everyone to reserve judgment.  

How Reliable is Social Media Evidence?

The fact that the prosecution relied on social media evidence became a major talking point in later media reports. It immediately became clear that certain social media posts – including online essays – contained allegations with no real proof behind them. Despite the obvious shortcomings of this evidence, the prosecution seems to have based almost their entire around it. 

With all that being said, social media evidence is not inherently unreliable. In fact, social media evidence can help establish a defendant’s innocence. In a rape trial, certain online messages exchanged between the defendant and the alleged victim may prove or help establish a consensual encounter. Like any other form of evidence, social media is only unreliable when it is clearly devoid of any underlying facts.

Rape Investigation Turns Up Zero Evidence of Criminal Activity

Due to the fact that these alleged crimes took place while the defendant was working at the DA’s office, an official investigation was launched into the matter. An outside law firm was called in to conduct the investigation, and the investigators found no evidence of criminal acts. Although the law firm concluded that the defendant engaged in “concerning conduct,” they stopped short of labeling his actions unlawful. This was after they interviewed almost 30 different people and searched through numerous electronic documents. 

Serious questions have been raised after these revelations. If there was clearly no evidence to suggest any wrongdoing, why did prosecutors move forward with criminal charges? What reason did they have to suspect that a legitimate crime had occurred? Were they pressured by the influence of viral social media posts and numerous netizens demanding action for an alleged crime they did not fully understand? 

As Foss’ lawyer points out, this entire debacle “undermines the principles of due process and justice.” It should come as no surprise that Foss is now considering a defamation lawsuit. 

Find a Qualified Defense Attorney in Boston

Although the prosecutors often bring forth cases with very little real evidence to back their claims, a qualified defense attorney in Boston can quickly point out the flimsy foundation on which these arguments lie. As we have seen, false accusations have the potential to destroy reputations – even when they are completely devoid of any real evidence. Every defendant deserves their day in court, and this is an important part of the criminal justice system. Contact Edward R. Molari to defend yourself in a similar manner while protecting your reputation. 

Assault with Intent to Murder: What Recent Boston Shooting Charges Tell Us

A shooting or a gun incident in Boston may result in a wide range of charges, and “assault with intent to murder” is only one possible example. What does this phrase mean? As with many legal terms, the definition may seem vague and uncertain to those unfamiliar with Massachusetts law. It may be especially imperative to gain an understanding of the phrase for those facing this charge, and a recent case in Boston provides important insights: 

The Definition of Assault With Intent to Murder

Armed Assault with Intent to Murder is a serious crime in Massachusetts. It involves the use of a firearm to carry out an assault, with either the goal of murdering or robbing the victim. An important aspect of this offense is intent. In order to face the consequences of this crime, the prosecution must clearly establish that the defendant intended to cause the death of the victim. This requirement presents a range of possibilities for defense strategies. 

Defendant Convicted Due to Apparent Plot to Frame Him

Although intent is an important element in trials involving assault with intent to murder, there is also a much more basic requirement: Positive identification of the defendant. If the prosecution cannot clearly establish that the defendant was, in fact, the person who carried out the crime, they are not guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. As a result, they must be acquitted. This is what one recent trial centered around in Boston. 

In September of 2023, the Superior Court wrote that a defendant was convicted of assault with intent to murder despite the fact that no one had been able to positively identify him as the shooter. The prosecution’s case rested on the testimony of one witness, who claimed to have seen the defendant about 20 minutes prior to the shooting in the same vehicle a few blocks away. 

However, the defense counsel later received an anonymous text with information about an alleged plot to frame the defendant. The text included screenshots from the witness’ social media account. In addition, the prosecution was accused of improperly questioning the defendant’s decision to plead the fifth and their decision to show the defendant a photograph of his dead friend – something that was apparently inflammatory. Finally, the prosecution was accused of misleading the jury in their closing argument. 

The defendant requested voir dire examination of key evidence, but the judge denied this. The Superior Court found this to be a mistake and subsequently vacated the defendant’s convictions. Although a new trial will proceed, this is certainly an example of a successful defense strategy. 

Where Can I Find an Experienced Defense Attorney in Boston?

If you are facing gun charges such as “assault with intent to murder,” it may be helpful to get in touch with an experienced defense attorney in Boston. Choose Edward R. Molari, book a consultation, and discuss the details of these offenses in more detail. There are many potential defense strategies for gun and shooting charges in Boston, so get in touch today to assess the most appropriate course of action. 

Pages