Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

Massachusetts Legal Developments Blog

Cold Case Murder Trial in Boston Raises Important Questions About DNA Evidence

DNA evidence is often hailed as an infallible, irrefutable pathway toward streamlined convictions. Defendants may find it challenging to push back against the dogmatic, almost monotheistic "truth" of science in this situation. DNA evidence has proven particularly prevalent in cold cases, allowing the Commonwealth to try those linked with murders in Boston that occurred decades ago. But is DNA evidence really as reliable as we think? A recent case illustrates that police have ways of using your statements against you – even when DNA evidence seems questionable.  

Jury Selection Begins After DNA Evidence Leads to Murder Charges in Boston

In 1988, a deceased woman was discovered in Boston. Her body showed signs of strangulation, and the death was ruled a homicide. Based on biological evidence, police also concluded that her murderer had sexually assaulted her. The DNA evidence was submitted to the FBI, but the case went cold for the next few decades. No DNA matches were found until 2011, but the authorities were reluctant to press charges – believing that they still lacked sufficient evidence to link the suspect to the crime. Recently, prosecutors stated that they came across "additional evidence" that allowed them to proceed. The defendant has pleaded not guilty, and a trial will commence. 

Victim's Sex Worker Status Complicates DNA Evidence

Media reports fail to mention several crucial details. First, the victim was apparently a sex worker – and she was working at the time of her death. This assumedly explains the prosecutors' reluctance to bring charges despite the DNA match. 

Without going into too much detail, the defendant's DNA may have been deposited at the murder scene before the murder actually took place. If the sex worker dealt with numerous customers, it is impossible to say with absolute certainty that the murderer was the same person who left this DNA evidence behind. Prosecutors may have concluded that this evidence would not establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt – and many legal observers would undoubtedly agree with this conclusion. 

This shows how DNA evidence is not always as irrefutable as people might think. Putting aside the innovative technology behind this evidence, there are still certain factors that may affect its strength – including the profession of the victim and the circumstances of the crime scene. 

So, what made the prosecutors change their mind? The "additional evidence" mentioned by the media seems to be a single statement made by the defendant while being questioned. During this interview with police, he reportedly denied ever visiting prostitutes. This, according to the prosecutors, was enough to move forward with charges. 

If he never visited prostitutes, then he could not have been one of the prior customers of the murder victim. As such, the previous barrier to prosecution vanished with one simple sentence. This highlights the importance of remaining silent when being questioned by police. Always wait until your defense attorney arrives before communicating with the police. Even if you are attempting to deny your involvement in an alleged crime, police may still use your statements against you. 

Find an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer in Boston

Whether you are facing DNA evidence, "firearms forensics," or some other form of scientific evidence, it is all too easy to give up hope. However, this evidence may not be as strong as you think. An experienced criminal defense attorney in Boston can point out flaws in seemingly irrefutable technical data, making these "facts" much less convincing than they initially appear. To discuss this topic in greater detail, book a consultation with Edward R. Molari today.

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

Can Police Obtain My Hospital Records to Prove OUI in Massachusetts?

In Massachusetts, you might assume that your medical records are always private. Federal privacy laws prohibit healthcare providers from revealing your records, and doctors also protect your confidentiality from a purely ethical standpoint. But what happens when the authorities attempt to use your medical records to prove that you were Operating Under the Influence (OUI) in Massachusetts?  

In 2022, The Supreme Court Protected Medical Privacy for OUI Cases

In 2022, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts ruled that obtaining someone’s hospital records to establish their BAC level was unlawful. In the case of Commonwealth v. Eric J. Moreau, the State police obtained these BAC levels by analyzing a blood draw conducted by hospital staff while a defendant received medical treatment. The defendant never consented to having his blood taken, and the police never even informed him of what was happening. 

Initially, a judge stopped the defendant from suppressing the evidence. After review, however, the SJC found that this was a clear error. They concluded that every defendant must consent to a blood test – whether it is made by police officers or “at the direction” of police officers. The SJC concluded that if authorities fail to obtain consent, any subsequent test results become inadmissible. 

Things might have been different if the suspect had been transported to a police station instead of a hospital. Specifically, the SJC noted that if the officer had placed the defendant under arrest, refusal to consent to a BAC test would have resulted in separate penalties. This type of situation happens quite frequently, as car accidents often cause injuries that require immediate hospitalization. The SJC also noted that the officer could have theoretically placed the suspect under arrest before transport to a hospital. In past cases, officers have placed OUI suspects under arrest while traveling with them in ambulances. 

In 2024, The Supreme Court Reduced Medical Privacy With a New Decision

While Massachusetts gave defendants solid medical privacy for a few years, the SJC returned to the issue two years later and started backpedaling. In Commonwealth v. Bradley Zucchino, the Supreme Court ruled that the Moreau decision only applied to simple OUI. Because the defendant in this case was facing a charge of OUI causing serious bodily injury, authorities were allowed to use blood samples taken from the defendant during their hospital treatment – without consent. Although the defendant sought the same privacy protections under Moreau, the judge denied this motion – a decision that was backed up by the SJC. 

What made this crash different? First, the crash in the Moreau case was a single-vehicle collision where the defendant had crashed into a tree. Aside from the defendant, no one else was injured. In Zucchino, the defendant had crashed into another vehicle – and this collision caused one death. The defendant then faced charges of OUI causing serious bodily injury – preventing them from seeking the same protections laid out by Moreau. The SJC wrote that the defendant’s reading of Moreau was “too broad.” 

Contact Edward R. Molari Today

The conflict between medical privacy and OUI laws can be complex. To discuss your case and potential defense strategies in more detail, contact a Massachusetts OUI defense lawyer today. Book your consultation with Edward R. Molari. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

Can Police Obtain My Hospital Records to Prove OUI in Massachusetts?

In Massachusetts, you might assume that your medical records are always private. Federal privacy laws prohibit healthcare providers from revealing your records, and doctors also protect your confidentiality from a purely ethical standpoint. But what happens when the authorities attempt to use your medical records to prove that you were Operating Under the Influence (OUI) in Massachusetts?  

In 2022, The Supreme Court Protected Medical Privacy for OUI Cases

In 2022, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) of Massachusetts ruled that obtaining someone’s hospital records to establish their BAC level was unlawful. In the case of Commonwealth v. Eric J. Moreau, the State police obtained these BAC levels by analyzing a blood draw conducted by hospital staff while a defendant received medical treatment. The defendant never consented to having his blood taken, and the police never even informed him of what was happening. 

Initially, a judge stopped the defendant from suppressing the evidence. After review, however, the SJC found that this was a clear error. They concluded that every defendant must consent to a blood test – whether it is made by police officers or “at the direction” of police officers. The SJC concluded that if authorities fail to obtain consent, any subsequent test results become inadmissible. 

Things might have been different if the suspect had been transported to a police station instead of a hospital. Specifically, the SJC noted that if the officer had placed the defendant under arrest, refusal to consent to a BAC test would have resulted in separate penalties. This type of situation happens quite frequently, as car accidents often cause injuries that require immediate hospitalization. The SJC also noted that the officer could have theoretically placed the suspect under arrest before transport to a hospital. In past cases, officers have placed OUI suspects under arrest while traveling with them in ambulances. 

In 2024, The Supreme Court Reduced Medical Privacy With a New Decision

While Massachusetts gave defendants solid medical privacy for a few years, the SJC returned to the issue two years later and started backpedaling. In Commonwealth v. Bradley Zucchino, the Supreme Court ruled that the Moreau decision only applied to simple OUI. Because the defendant in this case was facing a charge of OUI causing serious bodily injury, authorities were allowed to use blood samples taken from the defendant during their hospital treatment – without consent. Although the defendant sought the same privacy protections under Moreau, the judge denied this motion – a decision that was backed up by the SJC. 

What made this crash different? First, the crash in the Moreau case was a single-vehicle collision where the defendant had crashed into a tree. Aside from the defendant, no one else was injured. In Zucchino, the defendant had crashed into another vehicle – and this collision caused one death. The defendant then faced charges of OUI causing serious bodily injury – preventing them from seeking the same protections laid out by Moreau. The SJC wrote that the defendant’s reading of Moreau was “too broad.” 

Contact Edward R. Molari Today

The conflict between medical privacy and OUI laws can be complex. To discuss your case and potential defense strategies in more detail, contact a Massachusetts OUI defense lawyer today. Book your consultation with Edward R. Molari. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

Undercover Police Recordings Suppressed in Massachusetts Drug Distribution Case

A recent case in Massachusetts focused on Callyo, a new software application gaining popularity among undercover police officers across the nation. While the app certainly has its uses, recordings made with this software may violate the Commonwealth’s wiretapping laws. A recent decision shows that these recordings may be suppressed. But can wiretapping laws really protect you from undercover police officers in Massachusetts? 

Commonwealth v. Du 

In October of 2023, the Commonwealth issued an important decision on the admissibility of secret recordings made by undercover police officers in drug distribution cases. In Commonwealth v. Du, a defendant faced distribution charges after being recorded making drug transactions on three different occasions. Each time, the defendant sold about $100 worth of narcotics to an undercover officer. Each time, the officer made secret recordings of the transaction without a warrant. The Callyo app transmitted the recordings live to other officers who were listening in, and it also uploaded and stored the recordings to the cloud. 

After facing distribution charges, the defendant argued that the recordings violated the Commonwealth’s wiretap statute. The Commonwealth then attempted to argue that the defendant had no expectation of privacy since the drug transactions were carried out in public spaces. In addition, the Commonwealth claimed that there was “reasonable suspicion” that the defendant had engaged in a drug distribution network – providing a clear exception to the wiretap law. 

These arguments failed upon review. The fact that the transactions occurred in public was irrelevant since the Commonwealth’s wiretap statute bans all “secret” recordings – regardless of where they take place. In addition, there was never any evidence that the defendant had carried out drug transactions as part of an organized crime organization. Officers only collected evidence of the “controlled buys,” and they never presented anything to suggest the defendant was part of a “narcotics distribution network.” The Commonwealth specifically noted that each of the three transactions involved small amounts of narcotics. In other words, the “organized crime” exception to the wiretap ban did not apply. 

As a result, the recordings were suppressed. The Commonwealth even discussed whether the officers should face criminal penalties for violating the wiretap statute. In Massachusetts, you can face up to five years in prison for willfully violating these wiretapping laws. A $10,000 fine is also possible. 

What Does This Case Mean?

While some observers may feel encouraged to hear that the Commonwealth is protecting its citizens against illegal surveillance from the authorities, the decision in Commonwealth v. Du does not completely negate the efficacy of undercover operations. In its decision, the Commonwealth specifically stated that the undercover officer who made the recordings could still testify on what they had witnessed during the transactions. This testimony could be as effective as a video/audio recording, and it might detail exactly what the defendant said and did during the transactions. 

In addition, the result might have been different if the defendant had been charged with drug trafficking, as the Commonwealth’s wiretapping laws would not have applied. 

Work With a Qualified Massachusetts Defense Attorney

If you have been charged with drug trafficking or drug distribution due to undercover police recordings, it is important to work with a Massachusetts defense lawyer. Book a consultation with Edward R. Molari today to get started. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

Massachusetts State Police Crack Down on “Multi-State” Drug Organization

In April of 2024, the official news blog of the Massachusetts State Police (MSP) announced the arrest of three suspected drug traffickers. Law enforcement also obtained a fourth arrest warrant for another suspect outside of the United States. This was the culmination of an investigation that began in the Fall of 2023, and police have been trying to bring down this alleged drug trafficking network for months.  

Numerous Law Enforcement Agencies Participate in Drug Bust

Images from the arrest show various seized items. These include bricks of fentanyl, bags of cocaine, wads of cash, presses, extended magazines, and ammunition. Law enforcement also laid out various department and agency crests to illustrate their participation in the operation. These organizations include the Rhode Island State Police, the Nashua Police in New Hampshire, and various departments throughout Massachusetts. The most prominent crest was that of the “State Police C.I.N.R.E.T,” which took center stage amidst the image of seized items. 

“C.I.N.R.E.T” stands for “Commonwealth Interstate Narcotics Reduction Enforcement Team,” and this organization’s mission is to take down various drug trafficking organizations. Law enforcement agencies describe its role as “unique,” stressing its “long-term, complex investigations.” Since its establishment, it has participated in numerous drug busts and arrests. In March of 2023, eight people were arrested in another C.I.N.R.E.T-sponsored takedown. 

In April’s three-person arrest, the organization participated with the State Police Detective Unit, the State Police Gang Unit, and Homeland Security. 

Police Seize Drugs Through “Undercover Drug Buys”

Although the image of seized drugs is certainly striking from a visual standpoint, police did not seize all of the drugs at one particular time. Instead, the image represents a collection of drugs seized over numerous months. An undercover Massachusetts State Trooper facilitated 10 “controlled buys” over the course of the investigation. Authorities then collected all of the drugs from these controlled buys, placed them on a table, and photographed them together. 

The MSP blog states that these controlled buys ranged from just 11 grams to 2,000 grams. In all likelihood, the undercover agent started with small purchases, eventually gaining the suspects’ trust and purchasing higher quantities as time went on. Police seized a much greater amount of fentanyl compared to cocaine – securing over 7,000 grams vs 900 grams of cocaine. This “high-potency, un-cut” fentanyl seems to have been the main focus. 

In one purchase alone, the undercover trooper paid $27,000 for two kilos of fentanyl. At the conclusion of this purchase, law enforcement moved in and arrested one of the three suspects. 

In addition, police say they seized 43 grams of meth in the operation. Four firearms and “several” high capacity magazines” were also reported by Massachusetts State Police – plus 100 rounds of ammunition. For whatever reason, law enforcement also seized two vehicles. 

Who Defends Alleged Drug Traffickers in Massachusetts?

The MSP blog describes this drug bust as a clear victory, but the suspects are innocent until proven guilty. Only the criminal justice process will determine whether these individuals will actually be convicted. Like all other defendants, the three arrested suspects will have access to criminal defense attorneys in Massachusetts. Edward R. Molari has been defending drug trafficking suspects for years, and defendants may consult with him for further guidance. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense
Drug Trafficking
Drug Possess to Distribute

19 Arrested on Drug Charges in Brockton, Massachusetts

Back in September of 2023, almost 20 suspects were arrested on drug charges in Brockton. Although this was a considerable detention of what police referred to as "street-level" dealers, it represented only one step in the Brockton Opiate Suppression Initiative. This program has been characterized by mass arrests, with at least two "sweeps" in the past few years taking in dozens of alleged dealers. How can police officers be so sure that each one of these suspects is a drug dealer? Are they casting their net too wide – potentially charging innocent people? How can authorities avoid so-called "guilt by association?" 

Brockton Drug Sweep Results in Mass Arrests

In September of 2023, authorities from 11 different law enforcement agencies suddenly descended upon Brockton, eventually taking 19 people into custody. Although this might seem like a high number, Brockton and State police actually obtained arrest warrants for a total of 31 people before executing the bust. In other words, 11 people escaped. As part of this drug sweep, authorities took possession of various "ghost guns," ammunition, drugs, and paraphernalia. Police specifically mentioned seizing fentanyl and crack cocaine. 

Many Brockton residents were not overly surprised by the sweep, as authorities have been targeting this low-income area for decades. Almost every year, law enforcement agencies pick one specific date to carry out mass arrests in Brockton. These arrests have continued on a regular basis since 2007 – often occurring sometime during summer. The sweeps usually take more than 20 people into custody. As we approach the summer of 2024, it seems likely that authorities will carry out another sweep at approximately the same time. 

What is the Brockton Opiate Suppression Initiative?

Although mass arrests have been occurring since 2007 in Brockton, the "Brockton Opiate Suppression Initiative" is a relatively new development. It was first announced during a press conference in 2022, and an official web page on the Plymouth County District Attorney's site from this date describes the initiative in vague terms. The page simply states:

"Drug dealers are plaguing some Brockton neighborhoods. Law-abiding citizens living here deserve better. Thanks to all involved, Brockton is a safer place as a result of these efforts." 

Another web page states:

"The goal of this operation was to address issues related to opiate distribution and other drug dealing activities, violence, quality of life issues, and related crimes in the community."

It is not exactly clear how this initiative differs from past mass arrests in Brockton throughout the years – other than giving drug sweeps a special name. 

Find a Drug Crime Defense Attorney in Brockton

If you are facing drug charges in Brockton, Massachusetts, you can defend yourself confidently alongside a qualified drug crime defense lawyer. Perhaps you were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, and you were caught in a "drug sweep" as part of the Brockton Opiate Suppression Initiative. Perhaps you are facing charges because you associate with a dealer – and not because you personally engaged in any drug offenses yourself. Whatever the case may be, there is hope for justice and freedom. Choose Edward R. Molari, book a consultation, and get started with an effective defense strategy today. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense
Drug Trafficking
Drug Possess to Distribute

Supreme Court Enforces Double Jeopardy Protection

Sentencing under Massachusetts Murder Laws

In Massachusetts, the sentence for murder in the first degree is life without possibility of parole. Murder in the first degree occurs when someone commits a premeditated, intentional killing. The sentence for murder in the second degree, on the other hand, is life with the possibility of parole. If you are convicted of murder in the second degree, you generally become eligible for parole within 15 to 25 years. 

What is Double Jeopardy

Double jeopardy falls under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states that defendants cannot be charged for exactly the same offense twice in the same jurisdiction. It is possible to charge someone for two different offenses with the same evidence, however – and it is also possible to try defendants separately under virtually identical State and federal laws. 

Supreme Court Issues Important Decision on Double Jeopardy Incident

Despite protections from double jeopardy, sometimes defendants face the prospect of new trials for the same offenses. The Supreme Court was forced to step in in one recent case involving a mentally ill defendant who successfully pursued a not guilty verdict by reason of insanity. However, he was still convicted of lesser offenses in connection with the same crime. The State courts in this case found that these two rulings were incompatible or “repugnant.” In other words, he should have been acquitted of both sets of crimes if he was truly insane. 

This subsequently led to the theoretically impossible scenario of double jeopardy. It was at this point that the Supreme Court stepped in and established that the inconsistency between verdicts was not an issue. This man could not be tried again under any circumstances, and the decision was reversed and remanded. Specifically, Justice Jackson stated that “The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits second-guessing the reason for a jury’s acquittal. She went on to state that the jury had “unreviewable power to return a verdict of not guilty even for impermissible reasons.”

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

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. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

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. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

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. 

Tags: 
Criminal Defense

Pages