College Students Charged with Crimes
Boston College Student Criminal Defense – Massachusetts College Student Crimes Attorney
College Student Defense / Protect Your Future
Contact Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio
Don’t let a mistake ruin your life. If you are a student attending a College or University in Massachusetts and charged with a crime or being investigated for a crime committed on or off campus, before trying to resolve the case on your own or saying anything to the police, campus police or investigators, it is of the utmost importance that you speak with an attorney to protect your rights. Criminal charges are not only stressful they carry serious consequences that can affect your future, freedom and continued enrollment in school. Attorney Topazio can help you through this experience and will protect your rights, making sure you don’t make incriminating statements the police may use against you later to connect you to other crimes. Contact Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to discuss your case. He responds promptly to all emails received by the firm.
Protecting Your Child’s Future at a Critical Time
Being charged with a crime while at school can be devastating. You must deal with the consequences of:
* The criminal charge
* Possible college disciplinary action, which could result in your expulsion from campus housing or your college
* A possible criminal record that can harm your career prospects and employability
An experienced Criminal Defense Attorney can help you navigate through the criminal justice system.If this is your first time you have been in trouble, some criminal charges can be resolved without a conviction.If you have been arrested or facing criminal charges don’t let a mistake you made in college affect you for the rest of your life. Email us to schedule a free consultation.
Experience that Makes a Difference
Attorney Topazio has practiced criminal law in Massachusetts for nearly 28 years and has dealt with all types of cases involving college, university, and graduate students. He will help you understand the criminal process, defend you against the charges and explain the alternatives that might be available. Attorney Topazio knows that a college, university or graduate student convicted of a crime not only must complete the criminal sentence, but might also be expelled from school and lose financial aid and any government grants or scholarships.
At the time of your arrest, police and prosecutors may make all kinds of claims regarding what they know. During the initial stages of an investigation, it isn’t always easy to tell how much information and evidence investigators actually have. That’s why it is essential to hire a lawyer who can advise you regarding what to say and what not to say. In many cases, police not only want a confession they also want to connect you to other crimes — crimes you may know nothing of or have anything to do with. Making admissions won’t result in the charges against you being dropped — they will only complicate matters for you later when you go to court.
Contact Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio
A felony or misdemeanor conviction means a criminal record that can affect employment, college entrance, student loans, and other aspects of your life. More serious offenses may carry mandatory jail or prison sentences, plus major fines and restitution. There is no such thing as a minor charge. Any criminal charge needs the advice and counsel of an experienced criminal defense attorney. Contact Attorney Steven J. Topazio for a free confidential consultation.
RECENT CASE DECISIONS
Traffic Citation, College Student, Unregistered Motor Vehicle MGL c. 90 § 9; Operating with Suspended License MGL c. 90 § 23; All charges dismissed following Clerk Magistrate Hearing.
- Steven Topazio wrote this May 25, 2016 at 5:49 pm
The client, a 22 year old college student, received a criminal citation after a State Trooper stopped the client’s motor vehicle in the Ted William’s Tunnel. The Trooper ran the client’s license through his mobile data terminal in his cruiser and received information that the client’s registration and driver’s license was suspended and wrote her a criminal citation. The client maintained that she had no knowledge of the suspension. Wanting to challenge the charges, the client hired Boston Criminal Attorney Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio told his client to appeal the citation and she would receive an application for criminal complaint in the mail. The client received the traffic ticket after she went to the airport to pick up her sister. Attorney Topazio contacted the registry of motor vehicles and discovered that unpaid excise taxes caused his client’s suspensions. Attorney Topazio argued to the Magistrate that his client planed on traveling overseas and was anxious to resolve this matter and further corrected her license and registration issues with the RMV and paid all outstanding and required fees. As a result of providing proof of payment of the outstanding excise tax bill which caused the suspension issue, Attorney Topazio was able to persuade the Magistrate to dismiss the complaint.
December 20, 2013
Brighton District Court
Docket # 1308CR1199
Assault and Battery MGL c265 § 13A(a)
Domestic Violence
The client, a 21-year old graduate student, was arrested for domestic assault and battery after getting a fight with her boyfriend, allegedly hitting and scratching his neck because he refused to give her back money she loaned him, hired Boston Domestic Violence Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent her. The client was in the United States on a student F1 Visa and would face the possibility of adverse immigration consequences if convicted for a domestic assault and battery. Attorney Topazio met with the prosecutor and the boyfriend’s counsel to work out an accord, without success. Attorney Topazio then instructed his client to file charges against her boyfriend who had a history of physically hitting and abusing his client, and the case was continued for trial. Today at trial, Attorney Topazio persuaded the court to dismiss the case against his client.
Result: Case dismissed at trial.
November 22, 2013
Wrentham District Court
Docket # 1357CR1292
Assault With Dangerous Weapon MGL c. 265 § 15B(b)
College Student
The client, a 22 year old high school graduate and landscaper, was arrested by Millis Police and charged with assault with a dangerous weapon after getting into a fight with a group of males and observed trying to hit them with an aluminum bat, hired Boston Criminal Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend him. The client maintained that he was attacked earlier and was only defending himself when the group confronted him a second time. Attorney Topazio investigated the matter and discovered video surveillance from a local establishment which captured the earlier event and showed the prior altercation where the other group of males confronted his client and tried to fight him. Attorney Topazio met with the Millis Police prosecuting officer and provided him with the contents of his investigation, arguing that his client was the victim and that his client’s version explains his actions. Attorney Topazio challenged the police characterization of his client unilaterally attacking the other group without provocation. Nevertheless, although Attorney Topazio argued that his client was acting in self-defense, he agreed that his client should have gone to the police first instead of taking matters into his own hands. By conceding that his client may have used too much force in defending himself and thus may have an imperfect right of self-defense, Attorney Topazio was able to persuade the Millis Prosecutor to agree to give his client pre-trial probation, with a condition that he complete an anger management program. Today, with the consent of the prosecutor, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to place his client on a term of pre-trial probation.
Result: Client avoids a felony conviction and case will be dismissed at conclusion of pre-trial probation.
November 20, 2013
Boston Municipal Court
Docket # 1301CR3804
Malicious Destruction of Property MGL c. 90 § 22(2)(a)
College Student
The client, a 19 year old college student, who was in Boston celebrating the Fourth of July, got arrested after punching and breaking the windshield of a motor vehicle, hired Boston Criminal Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio met with the district attorney in an attempt to resolve the case and requested pre-trial probation with the condition that his client, who had no prior criminal record, do 30 hours of community service and pay restitution for any damage he caused. Pre-trial probation pursuant to MGL c. 276 section 87 is a court-approved agreement or contract between the prosecutor and defendant before a trial, a plea of guilty, or admission to sufficient facts to warrant a finding of guilty. Under such an agreement, a defendant is placed on probation for a period of time and under certain conditions. According to the 2003 case of Commonwealth v. Cheney, a judge cannot place someone on supervised probation without a trial and then dismiss the case over the Commonwealth’s objection. The assistant district attorney considered Attorney Topazio’s request but indicated that he had to call his supervisor to get authority to agree to pre-trial probation. Today, the district attorney’s office agreed to pre-trial probation and the court placed the client on pre-trial probation for six months. There was no admission to any crime and the client maintains a clean criminal record.
Result: Case to be dismissed after period of pretrial probation.
October 15, 2013
Brighton District Court
Docket # 1308CR0824
OUI – Liquor MGL c. 90 § 24
Drunken Driving – DUI
College Student
The client, a 22 year old college senior, was on probation in another court for drug offenses, was arrested for drunk driving after crashing his car in a congested Boston neighborhood, and hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to defend him. Attorney Topazio obtained photographs of the crash scene and his client’s car which had flipped onto its roof after allegedly striking several other cars. The client could not recall the events leading up to the crash after leaving a local bar. According to the police report, a civilian witness pulled the client from his car after it crashed and described the client as being severely intoxicated. Attorney Topazio met with the Assistant District Attorney in an attempt to resolve the case. The client had already received two CWOF’s on his CORI and wanted to resolve this case in the same fashion so as to avoid a conviction or possibly jail time. Despite the severe accident and several damaged cars, Attorney Topazio requested that the court give his client a CWOF upon his change of plea, so as to protect his client’s record and allow him to obtain a hardship license provided he enter into and complete the alcohol education program, and the court agreed with the condition that his client pay restitution for all the vehicles involved in the accident.
Result: Client given a continuance without a finding thus protecting his record.
October 03, 2013
Eastern Hampshire District Court
Docket # 1298CR3101
Possession Class B Amphetamines c. 94C § 34
Possession with intent to Distribute Class B c. 94C § 32A(a)
Distribution Class B Cocaine c. 94C § 32A(a)
Possession Class B Cocaine c. 94C § 34
Operating Under the Influence c. 90 § 24
Probation Surrender
College Student
The client, a 22 year old college senior, was on probation for two years after receiving a continuance without a finding on several drug related offenses, was arrested for on drunk driving charges while on probation which violated his probation, hired Boston Criminal Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to defend him. A violation of probation could result in revocation of the client’s CWOFs where guilty findings could be imposed and where the client could face up to 2 ½ hears in a house of correction and end up a convicted felon. The client had no prior record and did not want to go to jail or end up with a felony conviction on his record. Distribution of a Class B substance which the client was on probation is a felony charge. Attorney Topazio continued the final surrender so as to prepare for hearing. According to the police report, the drunken driving offense involved the client crashing and flipping his car onto its roof. Attorney Topazio wanted to negotiate a resolution of the probation violation prior to a resolution of the DUI charge due to the seriousness of the accident. Today, although the probation department was not prepared to proceed with the final surrender hearing, Attorney Topazio agreed to have his client stipulate to a violation of probation instead of continuing the hearing on the condition that his client’s CWOFs remain intact and that his client’s probation be renewed to the original date and the court agreed.
Result: Probation renewed and Client avoids a felony conviction and possible jail sentence.
September 25, 2013
Somerville District Court
Docket # 1310AC0970
Marked Lanes Violation c. 89 § 4A
Operating with Suspended License c. 90 § 23
Application for Criminal Complaint
Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing
College Student
The client, a 21 year old college senior, was stopped for speeding after being caught on Lidar traveling 52 mph in a 35 mph zone and thereafter was giving a citation for speeding and operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license when it was discovered that the client’s driver’s license was suspended, hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to represent him. Attorney Topazio learned that his client’s license was suspended for three surchargeable events. Massachusetts has a bad driver point system which is called “surchargeable points” and is based on the state’s Safe Driver Insurance Program. Every time a motorist is found responsible for a moving violation―like a speeding ticket, for example―he gets a “surchargeable event” on his record. In Massachusetts if you are found responsible for three speeding violations within a 12 month period, your driver’s license will be suspended automatically for 30 days. Attorney Topazio instructed his client to request a Magistrate’s hearing and to take all steps necessary to reinstate his driver’s license. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the Clerk Magistrate not to issue a criminal complaint against his client or to find him responsible for the speeding violation on the condition that if the case is continued for three months and his client return to court after three months without any further motor vehicle violations, then both charges would be dismissed.
Result: Case to be dismissed and client avoids a surcharge and increase in his insurance rates.
September 04, 2013
Chelsea District Court
Docket # 1214CR1384
Receiving Stolen Motor Vehicle c. 266 § 28(a)
Unlicensed Operation of MV c. 90 § 10
Use Without Authority c. 90 § 24(2)(a)
Student
The client, a 20 year old High School student, was arrested after a foot pursuit by police who stopped him and arrested him at gunpoint for receiving stolen motor vehicle, a felony charge, was represented by Boston Criminal Lawyer Steven J. Topazio. According to the police report, the client who ran from police after fleeing the car he was in when he saw the police, then made a statement to the effect that he met a Spanish guy near the Home Depot in Chelsea about an hour earlier who had two cars and gave the client one of the cars and told him he didn’t need it any longer and that the client could keep it. The client further stated that he thought that was weird but took the car, despite not having a driver’s license. The prosecutor argued the fact that because the client ran from police he demonstrated consciousness of guilt. Whenever the prosecution argues that certain evidence indicates consciousness of guilt, the court is required at the defendant’s request to instruct the jury: (1) that they may, but need not, consider such evidence as a factor tending to prove the defendant’s guilt; (2) that they may not convict on the basis of such evidence alone; (3) that flight or similar conduct does not necessarily reflect feelings of guilt, since there are numerous reasons why an innocent person might flee; and (4) that even if flight or similar conduct demonstrates feelings of guilt, it does not necessarily mean that the defendant is guilty in fact because guilt feelings are sometimes present in innocent people. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the prosecutor to reduce the charges to the misdemeanor charge of use without authority, and the case was continued without a finding for six months and the charge of unlicensed operation was dismissed.
Result: Charge reduced to misdemeanor and case continued without a finding for six months.
August 30, 2013
Boston Municipal Court Central Division
Docket # 1301CR2348
Disturbing the Peace c.272 § 53
Resisting Arrest c. 268 § 32B
A&B with Dangerous Weapon c. 265 § 15A
College Student
The client, a 23 year old college student, was at a bar in Boston when her cousin got into an altercation and was stabbed. After the police arrived, the client was arrested by police who felt the client was interfering with their investigation, was represented by Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio learned that his client was angry with police, and swore and yelled at them, and then when cuffed, kicked the officer, but only after her shoes had fallen off. Attorney Topazio argued that this case resulted from an unfortunate miscommunication between the client and police in a heated moment where the police did not know a relative was stabbed. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded the prosecutor to give his client pretrial probation with the condition that she write a letter of apology to the officer. Chapter 276 Section 87 of the Massachusetts General Laws allows a court to place a person on pretrial probation instead of forcing the client to trial or having the client pleads guilty. Pretrial probation occurs prior to trial or a plea of guilty, and is a court-approved agreement between the prosecutor and defendant for a certain period of time and under certain conditions with the end result of all charges being dismissed if the client complies.
Result: After pretrial probation case to be dismissed.
August 16, 2013
East Boston Division of Boston Municipal Court
Docket # 1305CR0780
Assault and Battery on Police Officer M.G.L c.265 § 13D
College Student
The client, a 2013 high school graduate and incoming freshman at the University of New Hampshire, after allegedly pushing a Winthrop Police officer into oncoming traffic who was questioning him, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio learned that when the police encountered his client that his client’s face was swollen and covered in blood, the result of being jumped and beaten earlier by other individuals. Attorney Topazio obtained photographs of his client and medical records which indicated that his client suffered a broken nose and cracked tooth, and provided same to the Assistant District Attorney. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded the Assistant District Attorney to place his client on pretrial probation for a period of three months with a letter of apology to the police officer. Being placed on pretrial probation means the client did not have to admit to committing the offense. Pretrial probation is not a guilty plea or a conviction which could affect his client’s ability to obtain financial loans from the Federal Government. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 276, section 87 allows for the court to place an individual on pretrial probation for a certain period of time. If the client stays out of trouble during the period of pretrial probation, the case will be dismissed.
Result: Client receives Pretrial Probation and avoids a trial and possible conviction.
August 01, 2013
Boston Municipal Court
Docket # 1301CR4427
Assault and Battery M.G.L c.265 § 13A
College Student
The client, a summer school student at Boston College, was arrested for assault and battery after allegedly getting into a fight with his roommate at BC over making too much noise in the dorm room, was represented by Attorney Steven J. Topazio. The client was full time college student at Oberlin College in Ohio, and attending school in the United States pursuant to a student visa. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded the court to place his client on pretrial probation for a period of six months with no travel restrictions, so his client can return to Oberlin College in Ohio to complete his education. Being placed on pretrial probation means the client did not have to admit to committing the offense. Pretrial probation is not a guilty plea or a conviction which could affect an individual’s immigration status. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 276, section 87 allows for the court to place someone on probation for a certain period of time. If the client stays out of trouble during the period of pretrial probation, the case will be dismissed.
Result: Client receives Pretrial Probation and avoids a trial and possible conviction.
June 12, 2013
Boston Municipal Court – Central
Docket # 1301CR1605
Disorderly Conduct
Resisting Arrest
The client, an 18 year old high school graduate, was arrested while attending a Dropkick Murphys concert at the TD Bank North Garden in Boston, hired Boston Criminal Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Topazio learned that his client was arrested after he entered the floor area of the concert, and was ejected from that area when he protested. Attorney Topazio provided a copy of the floor ticket to the Dropkick Murphys the client received as a Christmas gift from his parents, to the district attorney. Attorney Topazio pointed out that not only was his client authorized to have been in the floor area of the Dropkick Murphys concert when he was arrested, but his client didn’t even have the opportunity to watch the concert. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded the court to grant his client
May 30, 2013
Boston Municipal Court – Central
Docket # 1201CR5542
DUI MGL c.90 § 24
DUI, DWI, OUI
Drunk Driving
The client, a 21 year high school graduate, was arrested for drunk driving, and hired Boston Criminal Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend him. According to the police report, state police were dispatched to a report of a two car accident on Route 93N. While speaking with the client, the officer detected a strong odor of alcohol emanating from within the passenger compartment. The officer also noted that the client’s eyes were red and glassy and his speech was slurred. The client performed a field sobriety test in which the client failed all 3 tests. The client was then arrested and consented to a Breathalyzer Test which recorded a 0.19 BAC%. A 0.19 BAC% indicates that the client was more than twice the state limit of 0.08 BAC%. Because of the difficult fact pattern the client wanted to resolve the case by way of a change of plea in lieu of going to trial. To resolve the case, the Assistant District Attorney wanted the client to have a criminal record and be found guilty due to the motor vehicle accident and the high Breathalyzer result. Today Attorney Topazio persuaded the judge to give his client a continuance without finding (CWOF) in lieu of adopting the Commonwealth’s recommendation which would have resulted in the client being found guilty.
Result: Client avoids a conviction upon a change of plea and receives a CWOF which allows him to honestly answer on any job interview that he has never been convicted of a crime.
May 29, 2013
Eastern Hampshire District Court
Docket # 1298CR3101
Possession of Class B Substance (Ecstasy) MGL c.94C § 34
Possession with Intent to Distribute Class B MGL c. 94C § 32A
Distribution of Class B Substance MGL c.94C §32A
Possession of Class B Substance (Cocaine) MGL c.94C § 34
A 22 year old college student, charged with two counts of possession of Class B substance, (cocaine and ecstasy), Possession with Intent to Distribute Class B substance and Distribution of a Class B substance, hired Boston Criminal Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend him following his arrest at school. The client was arrested by college police after the client sold cocaine to an undercover police officer. Attorney Topazio discovered that his client was not the initial focus of police investigation. According to a police narrative, police contact was made with a source of information that identified a third party student living in a residence hall at a university who was selling cocaine. Though text messages, the officer was able to negotiate the purchase of cocaine with the third party student. Prior to the initial scheduled sale of cocaine negotiated by the third party student and the police, the third party student notified the undercover officer that she was too busy to complete the sale but that her friend (the client), would do it for her. The officer met with the client to purchase 1 gram of cocaine for $80. Before the officer completed the transaction, she gave the client $70 instead of $80 and stated that that was all she had and that he could break off a piece of the rock-like substance, which he did do, to adjust for the price. The client was thereafter arrested and charged with distribution, including possessing with intent to distribute the pieced of cocaine he broke off at the officer’s request. The Commonwealth failed to charge the client with distribution in a school zone and before the Commonwealth brought out new charges, Attorney Topazio advised his client to tender a change of plea in order to avoid the more serious charges being filed. Attorney Topazio used his client’s lack of sophistication with the drug transaction to his advantage. Despite the Commonwealth requesting that the client be found guilty, Attorney Topazio obtained letters of recommendation from school faculty and friends and prepared a sentencing memorandum for the court. Attorney Topazio was able to convince the court to dismiss the Possession with Intent to Distribute Class B substance (cocaine) and possession of ecstasy charges and to give his client a continuance without finding (CWOF) on the felony Distribution charge and possession of cocaine charge despite the Commonwealth’s insistence on a guilty finding.
Result: Two counts dismissed and client accepts CWOF on two counts and avoids jail time and a felony conviction on his record.
May 23, 2013
Milford District Court
Shoplifting MGL c. 266 § 30A
Clerk Magistrate Hearing
Application for Criminal Complaint
A 20 year old college student who received a summons for shoplifting hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. According to the merchant, the client opened packages and concealed the items on his person and tried to leave the store without paying. According to statute, any person who intentionally transfers any merchandise displayed, held, stored or offered for sale by any store or other retail mercantile establishment from the container in or on which the same shall be displayed to any other container with intent to deprive the merchant of all or some part of the retail value thereof shall be guilty of shoplifting. Attorney Topazio met with his client and pointed out that despite being caught and summonsed to court for a Magistrate hearing, his client received a huge break from the police who decided not to arrest him. According to Massachusetts law, Law enforcement officers may arrest without warrant any person he has probable cause for believing has committed the offense of shoplifting as defined by statute. The statement of a merchant or his employee or agent that a person has violated a provision of the shoplifting statute shall constitute probable cause for arrest by any law enforcement officer authorized to make an arrest in such jurisdiction. Today, Attorney Topazio took advantage of this opportunity and convinced the Magistrate, despite the Magistrate’s finding probable cause that his client shoplifted, to hold the complaint for six months on the condition that if his client stay out of trouble the complaint will be dismissed.
Result: Complaint held and to be dismissed in six months provided client stays out of trouble and client’s CORI protected.
April 26, 201
Cambridge District Court
Docket # 1352CR0559
Deface Property MGL c. 266 § 126
Tagging Property M.G.L. c. 265 § 15B
The client, an 18 year high school student and band member, was arrested after spray painting the name of his band on the walls of a hotel bathroom, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend him. The client was initially charged with defacing property which only carries a penalty of up to a $100.00 fine plus cost of removal. The district attorney’s office was moving to take out new charges against his client which allege tagging of property. According to statute, whoever sprays or applies paint or places a sticker upon a building, wall, fence, sign, tablet, gravestone, monument or other object or thing on a public way or adjoined to it, or in public view, or on private property, that person is described as a “tagger” and such conduct or activity is known as “tagging” shall be punished by imprisonment in a house of correction for not more than two years or by a fine of not less than fifteen hundred dollars or not more than three times the value of such damage to the property so defaced, marked, marred, damaged or destroyed. Today Attorney Topazio convinced the District Attorney not to file new charges against his client but rather persuaded the district attorney to place his client on a term of pretrial probation for one year with 25 hours of community service plus restitution, and the court agreed.
Result: Case to be dismissed after successful completion of pretrial probation.
April 11, 2013
Boston Municipal Court – Central
Docket # 1301CR0943
Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon MGL c. 265 § 15A
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon M.G.L. c. 265 § 15B
The client, a 20 year high school student, was arrested after an individual he was with on a bus got off the bus and stabbed another individual during a fight, was represented by Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio. According to the police report, the police were dispatched for a report of a stabbing at Boston Medical Center. The report states that a third party had an argument with the victim and then exited a bus he was on with the client, and then stabbed the victim. According to the police report, the client did not get off the bus until the next bus stop, but then ran towards the fighting parties. The police report states that the client was identified “as being present and who were the individuals chasing them as they made their way into the hospital.” The police report did not indicate that the police observed the client commit any stabbing nor indicated that the client knew that third party possessed a dangerous weapon (a knife) or was going to stab the victim. Attorney Topazio argued that it is clear from the facts that the defendant did not stab the victim. Attorney Topazio argued that the Commonwealth them must establish that the defendant acted as a joint venture in order to be found guilty. In Massachusetts, a person may be found guilty of Assault and Battery with Dangerous Weapon in violation of M.G.L. c. 265 § 15A and Assault with a Dangerous Weapon in violation of M.G.L. c. 265 § 15B even if he did not personally do the act, but instead was present at the scene of a crime, and aided and abetted its commission as part of a joint venture with the third party. Attorney Topazio argued that the offenses were not part of a criminal enterprise. The client possessed no weapons. No evidence suggested that the client knew that the third party possessed a knife. Attorney Topazio argued that his client could not possess the necessary intent for a joint venture since the client did not know what was going on or participated actively in the crime. The court agreed with Attorney Topazio that the client did not associate himself with the joint venture as he was on a bus when the stabbing occurred. Attorney Topazio persuaded the court that the attack in this case was not planned but rather spontaneous and that the client did not participate in the physical acts which make up the crime but only came upon the scene after the attack occurred. Attorney Topazio was able to convince the court to reduce the charges to simple assault, in violation of MGL c. 265 § 13A, and his client accepted a sentence of nine months’ probation.
Result: Charges reduced to simple assault and Client accepts nine months of probation.
September 18, 2012
BMC Brighton District Court
Docket # 1208CR1484
Passing violation, 730 CMR § 7.08(14)
Inspection Sticker, 730 CMR § 7.08(26)
Speeding, 730 CMR § 7.08(6)(a)
The client, a 26 year old UMASS Amherst student, received a civil motor vehicle citation while on the Mass Pike. The Client initially represented himself at the initial Clerk’s hearing but lost the hearing and was found responsible by the Clerk Magistrate and ordered to pay. A responsible finding would have triggered a license suspension for the client so he appealed. The client thereafter contacted and hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Steven J. Topazio to represent him on his appeal to the judge. Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Topazio had his client obtain a copy of his college transcript and recent repair bills for his car in preparation for the hearing. Today, with Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney by his side, the court found the client Not Responsible of all violations.
Result: Case dismissed after appeal.
September 12, 2012
Waltham District Court
Docket # 1251CR0322
Possession with intent to Distribute Class D – Marijuana, M.G.L. c. 94C § 32C
Distribute Class D – Marijuana, M.G.L. c. 94C § 32C
The client, a senior at Babson College, was arrested after police from the Suburban Middlesex Drug Task Force executed a search warrant on the client’s home, after completing an investigation involving several undercover purchases of marijuana of approximately one ounce per buy from the client, over the course of several weeks, hired Boston Criminal Drug Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. Boston Criminal Attorney Topazio obtained the return on the search warrant and learned that several pounds of marijuana, a digital scale, large sums of US currency, several smaller bags of marijuana, a heat sealing packaging machine, and numerous plastic bags used for packaging were seized from his client’s home. Boston Criminal Lawyer Topazio mounted a defense of trying to suppress the drugs by challenging the search warrant. Massachusetts Defense Attorney Topazio analyzed his client’s case which consisted of three undercover police buys of marijuana directly from the client himself at his home. The undercover police buys of marijuana were the basis of the evidence presented to for the magistrate for the issuance of the search warrant. Massachusetts Criminal Attorney Topazio filed discovery motions and prepared a motion to suppress with memorandum of law to challenge the search warrant. During the course of negotiations, the client agreed to tender an admission to sufficient facts but wanted to avoid jail time and a conviction at all costs. Today, Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Topazio persuaded the court to give his client a CWOF on three counts of distribution to an undercover officer and one count of possession with intent to distribute despite the Commonwealth’s recommendation of a guilty finding and a two year suspended sentence. A CWOF had the further benefit of not causing his client’s driving privileges from being suspended.
Result: Client avoids jail and a conviction on his CORI by admitting to sufficient facts and receives a CWOF on all counts.
November 02, 2011
Framingham Juvenile Court
Docket Intentionally Omitted
Operating to Endanger M.G.L. c. 90 § 24(2)(a)
Marked lane violation
The client, a 16 year old High School Student, received a criminal citation for operating to endanger after he crashed his motor vehicle into a tree after knocking over a mailbox and causing property damage. Attorney Topazio instructed his client to sign the back of the citation and to file it with the court within four days so as to preserve his client’s right to a magistrate’s hearing. Requesting a clerk’s hearing prevents the immediate issuance of a criminal complaint which in turn would also result in his client getting a criminal record. Attorney Topazio had his client obtain a copy of his school grades and documentation of school accomplishments; such as his client’s acceptance into the National Honor Society and Peer Ministry, among other things, in order to establish his client’s good character for the clerk at the upcoming hearing. Attorney Topazio met with the investigating officer in an attempt to negotiate a resolution of the matter and further to resolve any restitution matters. Today at the hearing on the application for issuance of criminal complaint, Attorney Topazio established through his client’s medical records that he was not drinking or consuming illegal drugs prior to the accident. Attorney Topazio also established that his client was not speeding or racing when the accident occurred, but rather established that the accident occurred as the result of his client falling asleep at the wheel. Attorney Topazio was successful in convincing the Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint, despite the Magistrate’s finding probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed, but rather to hold the complaint open for four months on the condition that his client stay out of trouble and complete a community service project through his peer ministry group at school by writing an article about the dangers and hazards of driving and then presenting it in school.
Result: Formal complaint does not issue and case to be dismissed following completion of community service project.
June 06, 2009
Wrentham District Court
0857 CR 3312
Threat to Commit Crime M.G.L. c. 275 § 2
Criminal Harassment M.G.L. c. 265 § 43A(a)
The defendant, a High School Senior, was suspended for fighting with a fellow classmate, then criminally charged for allegedly harassing and threatening that classmate and another while at a school sponsored sporting event. As a condition of release, the client was ordered to have no contact with the alleged victims, a difficult task since all parties attended the same High School. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted school officials to see if they would be willing to mediate the situation if the parties consented. After speaking with Director of Student Affairs and then meeting with the Principal of the High School, Attorney Topazio filed a motion with the court amending his client’s conditions of release to allow supervised contact with the complainants only in a structured setting of the High School and in the presence of each party’s parents and High School Officials. Attorney Topazio arranged for his client and his client’s parents along with the complainants and their parents to engage in a voluntary mediation with the Principal and Director of Student Affairs from the High School. Mediation was a success as all parties were in agreement in resolving the situation. Today, Attorney Topazio with the consent of the District Attorney caused his client’s case to be dismissed.
Result: Mediation a success and all charges dismissed.
March 04, 2009
Wrentham District Court
0857 CR 3312<
Threat to Commit Crime M.G.L. c. 275 § 2
Criminal Harassment M.G.L. c. 265 § 43A(a)
The defendant, a High School Senior, was suspended for fighting with a fellow classmate, then criminally charged for allegedly harassing and threatening that classmate and another while at a school sponsored sporting event. As a condition of release, the client was ordered to have no contact with the alleged victims, a difficult task since all parties attended the same High School. The defendant hired Attorney Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with his client and contacted school officials to see if they would be willing to mediate the situation if the parties consented. After speaking with Director of Student Affairs and then meeting with the Principal of the High School, Attorney Topazio filed a motion with the court amending his client’s conditions of release to allow supervised contact with the complainants only in a structured setting of the High School and in the presence of each party’s parents and High School Officials. Attorney Topazio arranged for his client and his client’s parents along with the complainants and their parents to engage in a voluntary mediation with the Principal and Director of Student Affairs from the High School. Mediation was a success as all parties were in agreement in resolving the situation. Today, Attorney Topazio with the consent of the District Attorney continued his client’s case to a date after his client’s scheduled graduation this year with an agreement that all charges would be dismissed provided no further problems between the parties occur by that time.
Result: Mediation a success and all charges to be dismissed after client graduates High School this year.