IN 2013, CLIENT’S EX-GIRLFRIEND OBTAINED A YEAR LONG RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST HIM FOR HARASSMENT. IN 2017, CLIENT’S EX-GIRLFRIEND SOUGHT A PERMANENT RESTRAINING ORDER ALLEGING MORE HARASSMENT BUT ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS THE RESTRAINING ORDER VACATED

In 2013, Client had a bad break up with a woman he had been dating for a few months. After the break-up, the woman obtained a restraining order against the defendant for harassment. After a hearing in which the woman presented evidence, the judge found evidence of harassment and issued a restraining order against the defendant for one year to end in 2014. After one year, the woman did not seek to extend the restraining order and it was terminated. In 2017, the woman sought a permanent restraining order against the defendant. The woman wrote a very lengthy affidavit detailing many instances of alleged harassment dating back to 2013.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinced the judge to vacate the permanent restraining order after he discredited many of the allegations in the woman’s new affidavit. In her new affidavit, the woman alleged that, back in 2013, the defendant tried running her over in his car. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the woman never mentioned this incident in her prior restraining order and she is now bringing this up for the first time 4 years later. In her new affidavit, the woman alleged that the defendant threatened to disseminate a nude picture of her to her employer and others. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the woman took this nude picture of herself and gave it to the defendant when they were dating. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the defendant never disseminated this picture to anyone. Finally, in her new affidavit, the woman alleged that the defendant mailed her a threatening letter. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the letter was unsigned and there was no proof that the letter was written by the defendant. After hearing, the judge vacated the permanent restraining order.

AFTER A HEARING, AND OVER THE OBJECTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH, JUDGE ALLOWS PATRICK J. NOONAN’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND ALL CHARGES, INCLUDING 3 COUNTS OF INDECENT ASSAULT & BATTERY ON A CHILD UNDER 14, ARE DISMISSED AGAINST 83 YEAR-OLD KOREAN WAR VETERAN

Back in 2011, a sixteen-year-old girl accused the Defendant of sexually abusing her, multiple times, over the course of several years, beginning when she was 6 years old. Based on the alleged victim’s allegations, Defendant was charged with 3 counts of Indecent Assault & Battery on a Child under 14 and 1 count of Indecent Exposure. During the pendency of the case, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan became concerned with the client’s competency to stand trial based on his deteriorating mental condition. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained all of the client’s medical records and retained a forensic psychologist to conduct an evaluation of the client to determine whether he is legally competent to stand trial. After conducting an extensive evaluation, the forensic psychologist gave her opinion that the client is not competent to stand trial due to his mental condition.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss based on his forensic psychologist’s opinion that the Defendant is not legally competent to stand trial. At the Motion to Dismiss Hearing, the District Attorney’s Office objected and argued that the case should not be dismissed based on the seriousness of the allegations, among other things. At the Hearing, the Judge accepted the opinion of the forensic psychologist and made a ruling that the Defendant is not competent to stand trial. After hearing the arguments of the parties, the Judge sided with Attorney Noonan and dismissed all charges.

MARIJUANA CHARGES ARE PERMANENTLY SEALED FROM COMPUTER PROGRAMMER’S CRIMINAL RECORD

Client is a 38 year-old computer programmer and information technology specialist. Client had a great job opportunity to work for a major financial company. However, client was worried that he would not get the job because of some old criminal charges on his record. When the client was 18 years old, he pled out to a charge of Possession of Marijuana. When the client was 19 years old, he pled out to another charge of Possession of Marijuana. Other than these two charges, from when the client was a teenager, client had no other criminal record.

Result: Worried about being denied a new employment opportunity due to his criminal record, client contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan who was able to permanently seal all charges from his criminal record.

CLIENT SEEKING U.S. CITIZENSHIP WAS CONVICTED IN 1989 OF A DEPORTABLE OFFENSE BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS THE CONVICTION VACATED. CLIENT CAN NOW REPORT TO IMMIGRATION THAT HE HAS NO CONVICTIONS ON HIS RECORD.

Client, is a 47 year-old Brockton resident, a happily married man, and father of 5 children. He is college educated and has a successful business as a Certified Real Estate Appraiser. He was born in Cape Verde and came to the U.S. when he was 10 years old. His wife and children are U.S. citizens but he is not a U.S. citizen. He has been a permanent residence and green card holder. It has been his lifelong dream to become a U.S. citizen. Client contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan because he was concerned about a prior felony conviction affecting his application for U.S. citizenship. In 1989, client was convicted of Burning Property with Intent to Defraud Insurance Company. It was alleged that the client burned his own vehicle in an attempt to recover money from his insurance company. According to federal law (8 U.S.C.A. §1227(2)(A)), Burning Property with Intent to Defraud an Insurance Company is considered a crime of moral turpitude and is a deportable offense. “Any alien who is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude is deportable.

Result: Client was concerned that his prior conviction for a deportable offense would affect his ability to become a U.S. citizen. Client had contacted other Attorneys who did not provide him with any confidence that anything could be done. Client contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan in desperation hoping that something could be done. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan told the client that he could try to get his felony conviction “vacated” and “dismissed” so that he could go into his immigration meeting with a record of no convictions. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained the court records and discovered that the court did not give him an alien warning when he pled guilty to the charge. Pursuant to G.L. c. 278, §29D, judge’s must warn a Defendant who is pleading guilty, or taking another disposition, of the immigration consequences of that plea. Failure to provide such a warning may provide grounds for a motion to vacate the conviction. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dug deeper and tried to find as much evidence surrounding the crime as possible. It was discovered that the client made all his car insurance payments and the insurance company did not pay anything out to the client. Therefore, the client could not have had the intent to defraud the insurance company because the insurance company did not suffer any financial loss. The facts were more consistent with the crime of Malicious Burning of Personal Property, which does not involve fraud. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Vacate his client’s conviction, which was allowed by the Judge and the case was dismissed. Now, the client has no conviction on his record.

DA’S OFFICE ARGUES THAT DEFENDANT IS TOO DANGEROUS TO RELEASE AND SEEKS TO HOLD HIM IN JAIL AS HE AWAITS TRIAL BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS HIS CLIENT’S RELEASE

Client, a 27 year-old lifelong resident of New Bedford, was arrested and charged with firearms offenses and evading police. At his arraignment, the DA’s Office moved the court to hold the Defendant in the House of Correction for 120 days or until his trial because the Commonwealth felt he was too dangerous to release. Fairhaven Police were called to the VWF for reports of an altercation involving members of a gang who were possibly armed with guns. When police arrived, Defendant fled the scene in his vehicle. Additional police units were dispatched to apprehend the fleeing Defendant. Eventually, police stopped the vehicle and ordered all the occupants out at gun point. Defendant admitted that he had a firearm in the glove compartment. Defendant was charged with Carrying a Firearm without a License (which carries a minimum mandatory jail sentence of 18 months), Improper Storage of a Firearm, and Failure to Stop for Police.

Result: As the client was sitting in jail, client’s mother contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan to get her son out of jail. At a hearing to determine whether the Defendant was too dangerous to release, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan introduced evidence and convinced the judge that the Defendant did not pose a danger to the public. Attorney Noonan introduced evidence that the Defendant is a lifelong resident of New Bedford, is presently employed in New Bedford, has strong roots in the community, has family in New Bedford, and did not pose of flight risk. In addition, Attorney Noonan challenged the evidence presented by the Commonwealth that his client was involved in a physical altercation at the VWF, that his client was armed during the altercation, and that his client was a member of a gang. Attorney Noonan pointed out that altercation at the VFW was purely verbal and that no witnesses reported seeing any sort of fight. Also, nobody identified the Defendant as being involved in the altercation. Lastly, there was only one witness who reported that the parties at the VWF were armed and gang members and this lone witness was never identified. The judge released the Defendant on a GPS device and did not impose any bail.

CLIENT, WITH A PENDING DRUG CASE, GETS ARRESTED FOR A NEW OFFENSE AND THE DA SEEKS TO LOCK HIM UP FOR 120 DAYS BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS CLIENT’S RELEASE

Client had a pending criminal case in the Brockton District Court where he was charged with two felony counts of Possession with Intent to Distribute Heroin and Marijuana. In that case, police conducted an investigation with a Confidential Informant who purchased drugs from the Defendant on two occasions. Police obtained a search warrant for the Defendant’s residence where they recovered large quantities of heroin and marijuana, along with other items indicative of a drug selling operation. While this drug case was pending, Defendant got arrested in Boston for Operating under the Influence of Liquor. When police searched his vehicle, they found 3 jars containing marijuana resulting in a new charge for Possession with Intent to Distribute Marijuana.

Result: The District Attorney’s Office moved to revoke the Defendant’s bail and have him locked up for 120 days (or until his Brockton case was disposed of) because the Defendant was arrested on new charges of OUI-Liquor and Possession with Intent to Distribute. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan convinced the Judge to release the Defendant on conditions rather than locking him up. The judge adopted Attorney Noonan’s proposal of placing Defendant on a GPS device and having him submit to drug testing.

PROSTITUTION CHARGE AGAINST UBER DRIVER AWAITING U.S. CITIZENSHIP DISMISSED AT CLERK-MAGISTRATE HEARING AFTER ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN ARGUES THE WEAKNESSES IN THE CASE

Defendant is a 46-year-old Brockton man who is married with two children. Defendant is a cab driver and Uber driver. Recently, he applied for U.S. citizenship and was awaiting a meeting with immigration on his application for citizenship. Defendant was charged with Sexual Conduct for a Fee. Boston Police were conducting a prostitution investigation. Police observed the Defendant’s vehicle parked on the side of the road in an area known to have high instances of prostitution. Police observed a female standing on the passenger side of the vehicle speaking to the Defendant. The female got into the vehicle and officers followed the vehicle, as it pulled into a parking lot. Officers observed Defendant’s vehicle bouncing up and down. Police approached the vehicle and saw the Defendant with his pants unzipped and his belt unbuckled. Police observed the female’s breasts partially exposed. The female told police that they agreed on $60 for sex but she stated that no money was ever exchanged.

Result: At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that there were probable cause issues with the case because no money was ever exchanged between the parties and the Defendant had no money on him. Usually, in a prostitution situation, money is exchanged beforehand and not after-the-fact. Attorney Noonan argued that, should the case proceed to trial, the Commonwealth would have difficulty proving the case because the female would likely not testify, as she had a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NEW TRIAL FOR CLIENT CONVICTED OF DRUNK DRIVING BECAUSE HER BREATHALYZER TEST PRODUCED SCIENTIFICALLY UNRELIABLE RESULTS

Defendant, a single mother, was arrested by Massachusetts State Police for Negligent Operation and Operating under the Influence of Alcohol. At the police station, Defendant agreed to have a Breathalyzer Test to determine her blood alcohol content. The breath test machine gave a blood alcohol content result of 0.11%, which is over the legal limit. Based on the breath test result of 0.11%, Defendant pled out to the OUI charge.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was hired to vacate the Defendant’s conviction and win her a new trial. Recently, in the case of Commonwealth v. Ananias, a District Court Judge ruled that a Breathalyzer Machine did not produce scientifically reliable Blood-Alcohol-Content results during the time period of June 2012 to September 2014. Relying on the Court’s recent decision, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that his client’s conviction should be vacated and she should be awarded a new trial because the Breathalyzer Machine used in her case did not produce scientifically reliable results. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in getting his client’s conviction vacated and a jury trial is now scheduled.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES CLERK-MAGISTRATE TO DISMISS CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 32 YEAR-OLD BARTENDER FOR IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM SO LONG AS THE CLIENT DOES NOT GET INTO ANY TROUBLE

Defendant, a 32 year-old bartender from Manchester by the Sea, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm. Defendant was recently given a license to carry firearms (LTC). Shortly after getting licensed, Manchester by the Sea Police received an e-mail from a woman who had submitted a letter of recommendation on the Defendant’s behalf when he applied for his LTC. The e-mail stated that the woman wished to rescind her recommendation because the Defendant was abusing cocaine and alcohol and had dramatic mood changes and had bouts of severe aggression. After the e-mail, police were called to Defendant’s residence after receiving a call from different woman who reported that the Defendant was abusing substances and had “10 out of 10 rage.” This woman told police that she was concerned because the Defendant had a black handgun in his home. When police arrived, Defendant was not home. Later on, police went to the Defendant’s apartment when he was home. They asked him about his handgun and he denied having any handgun. Police told him that they received a report from a witness that he did have a handgun. Defendant changed his answer and admitted that he had a handgun. When police entered the apartment, they saw that the handgun was not properly secured or stored.

Result: At a Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that there was insufficient probable cause to support the charge of Improper Storage of a Firearm because the handgun was within the Defendant’s “control.” In order to convict someone of Improper Storage of a Firearm, the Commonwealth must prove that the firearm was not under the Defendant’s control. Here, Attorney Noonan argued that the firearm was within his control because it was sufficiently nearby (only 18 feet away in his bedroom). Moreover, Attorney Noonan stated that his client had no intention of renewing his LTC or owning any firearms in the future. After hearing, the Clerk-Magistrate decided dismiss the criminal complaint after one-year so long as the Defendant does not get into any trouble.

A NURSE WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD WAS CHARGED WITH FELONY LARCENY BUT ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES DA’S OFFICE TO DISMISS CASE PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT AND SAVES HIS CLIENT FROM HAVING A CRIMINAL RECORD

Client is a 37 year-old mother of two with no criminal record. Client has been a Licensed Practical Nurse for 12 years and she performs Dialysis on patients with kidney failure.

Walpole Police were dispatched to Kohl’s Department Store for a report of two female shoplifters. Upon arrival, Police and Loss Prevention were watching the two females actively in the process of removing jewelry and concealing it in their purse. Police recovered several items on jewelry in the females’ possession and in their purse.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan acted quickly and was able to dismiss the criminal complaint prior to arraignment saving his client from having a felony charge on her record. This was a significant victory because the client was in the process of applying to a master’s program in nursing. Attorney Noonan provided proof that the client made civil restitution to Kohl’s. In addition, Attorney Noonan provided the DA with letters from his client’s employer attesting to her character.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NOT GUILTY VERDICTS IN CHILD ENDANGERMENT CASE

At trial, the Commonwealth introduced the following evidence: An identified civilian called West Bridgewater Police to report an erratic operator, later identified as the Defendant. The witness was following directly behind Defendant’s vehicle and saw the Defendant’s vehicle swerve entirely off the road almost striking a fence then quickly swerve back crossing into the oncoming lane. The witness stated that the Defendant stopped at a traffic light, stuck her head out the window, and proceeded to vomit twice. The witness went to the police station and filled out a written statement. West Bridgewater Police were dispatched to locate the Defendant’s vehicle. The police officer observe the Defendant traveling on a residential street and saw the vehicle cross over the center line and travel a quarter-mile with its wheels in the oncoming lane. The officer stopped the vehicle and observed vomit all over the side door and on the Defendant’s clothing. Immediately, the officer detected a strong odor of alcohol, noticed that her eyes were glassy and bloodshot, and observed that her speech was very slow and deliberate. Defendant admitted to drinking at a party. The police officer administered 5 field sobriety tests. In the officer’s opinion, Defendant failed all 5 field sobriety tests. The officer testified as to Defendant’s poor performance on all field sobriety tests and gave his opinion that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol. Defendant had her three young children in the car. Due to the fact that the Defendant was operating under the influence of alcohol with her three children in the car, she was charged with the aggravated felony offense of Child Endangerment, which carries an enhanced penalty.

Result: At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan attacked the credibility of the arresting officer by showing that the officer rushed to judgment and did not conduct a fair investigation. Attorney Noonan argued that as soon as the officer observed the vomit he made up his mind to arrest the Defendant for OUI-Liquor. Attorney Noonan showed that: Before the officer conducted any investigation, he told the Defendant to call someone to come and pick up her kids because he had already made up his mind to arrest her for drunk driving. Attorney Noonan called the Defendant’s friend to testify as a witness. The friend testified that she received a phone call from the Defendant who stated that she had been pulled over and needed her to come and pick up the kids. The friend testified that the officer grabbed the phone and told her to get down here immediately. Attorney Noonan argued the phone call was made while the Defendant was still sitting in the driver’s seat before she was asked to exit the car and submit to field sobriety tests. Shortly after receiving the phone call, the friend arrived to the scene and the Defendant was already under arrest. Attorney Noonan introduced the footwear the Defendant was wearing, which were boots with 2 inch heels. Attorney Noonan argued that it was difficult for the Defendant to perform the field sobriety tests demanded of her in these heels. Specifically, Defendant was asked to balance on one foot for 30 seconds while wearing these heels. In addition, the officer had Defendant walk 9 steps, back and forth, on an invisible line and maintain her balance in these heels. With regards to the vomit, Attorney called two witnesses to testify. These witnesses testified that they attended a funeral reception with the Defendant prior to her arrest. These witnesses testified that they ate the same food as the Defendant, chicken broccoli Alfredo. These witnesses testified that the chicken broccoli Alfredo was not cooked properly, smelled weird, and had a funky taste. They testified that they tasted the food and stopped eating it because it was gross. They testified to having conversations with the Defendant and others at the reception about the funky tasting food. They testified that the Defendant tasted the food and remarked that it tasted funky. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant vomited because of the bad food. The most compelling evidence came from the testimony of the owner and operator of a day care facility. Prior to getting pulled over, Defendant had picked up her kids at a day care facility and was on her way home when she was arrested. This witness testified that the Defendant dropped her three children off in the early morning while she attended the funeral. This witness testified that the Defendant came to pick up her three kids. This witness testified that they had a 10-minute conversation. This witness testified that she did not observe any signs to suggest that the Defendant may have been impaired by alcohol. This witness gave her opinion that the Defendant was not impaired by alcohol in any way. The witness testified that, as a licensed day care provider and a mandated reporter, she would have stopped the Defendant from driving away with her kids if she had any suspicion that Defendant was impaired by alcohol. After a two day trial, Defendant was found Not Guilty on all counts.

FELONY CHARGE AGAINST BROCKTON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT FOR SEXUALLY ASSAULTING A FEMALE STUDENT REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR SIMPLE ASSAULT & BATTERY, AFTER GERALD J. NOONAN PUSHES THE DA TO PUT ITS VICTIM ON THE STAND.

Client, a junior at Brockton High School, was accused by a female student of sexually assaulting her on a bus ride home from school. The female student alleged that the Defendant inappropriately touched her private areas when sitting next to her on the school bus. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan interviewed other students who were sitting in seats in front, behind, and across from the female student and Defendant. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan discovered that the other students did not witness what the female student alleged to have happened. The students did not witness the Defendant inappropriately touch the female student. In fact, some of the students stated that the female was having a good time on the bus, was laughing, and she did not appear to be in any sort of distress. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan discovered that the female student was having problems in school, had been kicked out of class, and was being disciplined by the school.

Result: Defendant had an open case for which he was on probation. When Defendant was charged with this sexual assault, the DA sought to violate the Defendant and possibly have him locked up or seriously punished. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan moved to have an evidentiary hearing and prove that there was no probable cause to support the sexual assault charge. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan subpoenaed the alleged victim, multiple times, to have her testify at the hearing. Each time she was subpoenaed, the alleged victim refused to appear. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan moved for trial. Prior to the trial, the Commonwealth offered to reduce the felony sexual assault charge to a misdemeanor Assault & Battery and place the Defendant on a very short probation. The client agreed to this offer.

GUN CHARGE AGAINST FREETOWN TRUCK DRIVER, WHICH CARRIED A MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCE OF 18 MONTHS, WAS DISMISSED AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO SUPPORT THE GUN CHARGE

Freetown Police were called to a residence after receiving 911 calls reporting that the Defendant retrieved a firearm and threatened to shoot his brother and then kill himself. Others in the house reported that the Defendant was mentally ill and a drug addict. Everyone had evacuated the home when police arrived. Defendant was arrested and brought to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. Defendant admitted that he did not have a license to possess the firearm and further stated that the bought the gun off the street.

Result: Defendant was charged with Carrying a Firearm without a License, which carries a mandatory jail sentence of 18 months. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of probable cause. Specifically, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that it was not illegal for the Defendant to unlawfully possess a firearm, so long as the firearm was under his “exclusive control” and possessed by him “in or on his residence.”

CLIENT CHARGED WITH THREE FELONY SEX OFFENSES HIRES ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN AND WALKS AWAY WITH ONLY ONE CONVICTION FOR A MISDEMEANOR THAT IS NOT A SEX OFFENSE.

Client, a 62-year-old Engineer from Fall River, was charged with three counts of Open and Gross Lewdness, which are felony sex-offenses. The charges stem from allegations that the Defendant was seen, by a witness, naked from the waist down on a trail in Hanover that is open to the public. A witness reported to police that she observed the Defendant, on two occasions, naked from the waist down, as she was walking her dog on a trail in a public park. Police installed trail cameras in the area where the witness saw the Defendant naked from the waist down. The police viewed the video footage, which showed the defendant, on two other occasions, walking on the trail wearing nothing from the waist down. Police conducted a stake-out where they hid in the woods in the area where the defendant was previously seen naked from the waist down. The officers saw the defendant walk by their location naked from the waist down. The police arrested the defendant. According to the Commonwealth, the Defendant, on at least 5 separate occasions, committed the offense of Open and Gross Lewdness.

Result: Defendant was charged with 3 counts of Open and Gross Lewdness. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan got 2 of the charges dismissed for lack of evidence leaving only 1 count of Open and Gross Lewdness remaining. On June 21, 2017, a jury trial was scheduled for the 1 remaining count of Open and Gross Lewdness. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appeared ready to try the case. On the day of trial, the Commonwealth offered to reduce the felony Open and Gross Lewdness to the misdemeanor offense of Indecent Exposure, which is not a sex offense. The Client agreed to plead guilty to the misdemeanor. The client is only convicted of a misdemeanor and it is not a sex offense. The client was facing three felony sex offenses, which carried jail time and possible sex offender registration.

CLIENT WHO CRASHED HIS CAR INTO A DITCH AND FLED THE SCENE BECAUSE HE HAD A REVOKED DRIVER’S LICENSE WILL HAVE ALL CHARGES DISMISSED AFTER 4 MONTHS SO LONG AS HE STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE AND PROVIDES PROOF THAT HIS DRIVER’S LICENSE IS REINSTATED.

Holbrook Police responded to a call for a motor vehicle in a ditch. When the police arrived, they could not locate the operator or any other occupants who may have been in the vehicle. Police located the vehicle’s registration showing that it was registered to the Defendant’s wife. Police located the wife and had her come to the police station for questioning. The wife told police that her husband, Defendant, had crashed the vehicle and fled the scene because he did not have a driver’s license. Defendant was charged with Operating with a Revoke Driver’s License, and Leaving the Scene of Property Damage.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his client has taken the steps to clear up his suspended driver’s license. The client owed money to the DMV in North Carolina and Attorney Noonan presented proof that his client paid his fees in full. Client owed money to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in Child Support and Attorney Noonan presented proof that the client paid his child support debts. Lastly, Attorney Noonan presented some evidence to show that his client completed classes that were ordered by the court in North Carolina for a previous driving related offense. The Clerk Magistrate agreed to dismiss the complaints after four months so long as the client stays out of trouble and provides the clerk with proof that his driver’s license is reinstated.

CLIENT’S DRIVER’S LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED FOR 3 YEARS DUE TO A SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE OUI BUT ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS A COURT ORDER TO REINSTATE THE CLIENT’S DRIVER’S LICENSE.

Client, a 33-year-old resident of Easton, had a conviction for OUI-Liquor where he was sentenced to one year of probation with the condition to complete the 24D program. Client was arrested for an OUI second offense where he refused the breath test resulting in a license suspension for 3 years because this was a subsequent offense. Client hired Attorney Patrick J. Noonan for his second-offense OUI and Attorney Noonan won a Not Guilty verdict. Even though the client was found Not Guilty of the second offense OUI, the Registry of Motor Vehicles nevertheless suspended his driver’s license because he refused the breath test and he was charged with a subsequent offense.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan appeared before the trial judge and obtained a court order to reinstate the client’s driver’s license. The client can now use this court order when he requests that the RMV reinstate his driver’s license.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS 3 CHARGES FOR IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING SO LONG AS THE CLIENT STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE FOR ONE-YEAR.

Taunton Police executed a search warrant of the residence of the client’s step-father. The client resided in his step-father’s residence. The police were investigating internet crimes against a child. The client was not the target of the investigation. The search warrant authorized police to search any persons present in the home. When the police executed the search warrant, they searched the client’s bedroom where they found, in the client’s bedroom closet, two assault rifles, a Glock 9 mm. and 7 large capacity clips. The found that the firearms and ammunition were not properly secured and they charged the client with 3 counts of Improper Storage of a Firearm.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that the Commonwealth must present sufficient evidence to prove that the firearms were “not” under the client’s control. Attorney Noonan argued that the firearms were within his client’s control because they were located in his bedroom closet and sufficiently nearby or in close proximity such that the client could access the firearms immediately. The Clerk Magistrate agreed to dismiss the complaint after one year so long as the client stays out of trouble and upon the condition that the client transfers all his firearms to another person who is authorized to possess them.

CLIENT WAS FOUND GUILTY OF A FELONY AFTER A TRIAL IN 1980 BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS THE CONVICTION VACATED AND DISMISSED.

The Client is a 63-year-old former carpenter from Dennis who remains disabled from a bad work-related accident. In 1980, when the Client was 26 years-old, he was charged with felony larceny for allegedly stealing trees and shrubs from a Nursery in Dennis. The Client went to trial and was found guilty of the felony larceny. The client, an avid hunter, has been a gun owner since he was 17 years-old. He has had a Firearms Identification Card (FID Card) since age 17 and has renewed his FID Card for the past 46 years with no issues. The Client was concerned that his FID Card would be denied for renewal because of the old felony conviction.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Vacate his client’s Conviction arguing that: there was insufficient evidence that the larceny was a felony because the value of the stolen property was not clearly proven, the client had a viable Motion to Dismiss because the stolen property was never recovered despite police executing a search of the client’s home, and trial judge may have committed error in permitting the client to be represented at trial by his co-defendant who was acting pro se. Prior to any hearing on the Motion to Vacate Conviction, Attorney Noonan had a conversation with the District Attorney’s Office who agreed to vacate the client’s conviction and enter a dismissal. Attorney Noonan then filed a new Motion to Vacate Conviction that was agreed to by the parties. The Judge allowed the Motion to Vacate and entered a dismissal, as requested by both parties.

IMPROPER STORAGE OF FIREARM: DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING

The Police Report states: Lawrence Police called the client into the police station to answer questions with regards to an investigation involving the discovery of the client’s firearm in the possession of another person who had been arrested. According to the police, the client was deceptive in the interview. The client maintained that he lawfully secured his firearm in key lock safe in his home. The person who was found in possession of the firearm was a former boyfriend of the client’s mother. The client speculated that the boyfriend may have stolen the firearm by obtaining the key, which was kept near the safe.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate’s hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets the criminal complaint dismissed and no criminal charge was put on the client’s record.

CHARGE OF IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST WORLD WAR II VETERAN AND RETIRED SECRET SERVICE AGENT DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING AND LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS REINSTATED.

Defendant, an 87-year-old resident of Marlboro, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm when his pistol was found unattended in the Dollar Tree store in Hudson. An employee at the Dollar Tree discovered the pistol on the floor and contacted the police. After the incident was reported to police, at approximately 3:00 a.m., the police came to the Defendant’s residence where they seized all his firearms and issued him a notice that his License to Carry was suspended. The Law Offices of Gerald J. Noonan contacted the Hudson Police and requested that the matter be scheduled for a Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing rather than proceeding directly to an arraignment, which would result in the criminal charge being entered on the Client’s record. The Hudson Police agreed and the case was scheduled for a Clerk’s Hearing.

Result: At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuaded the Hudson Police Department and the Clerk-Magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint outright. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant was unaware that his pistol fell out of his holster because the pistol was so small and light that he didn’t notice it fall out. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the Defendant acted promptly and appropriately once he discovered that his firearm was missing. Upon realizing that his pistol was missing, Defendant retraced his steps and went back to the Dollar and reported to them that his pistol fell out. The Defendant then promptly went to the police department to report the incident. Attorney Noonan explained that his client was an 87 year-old decorated Marine Corps veteran of WWII who’s been a responsible gun owner his entire life. The Defendant was a retired Secret Service agent who served his country and protected Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. Because the criminal complaint was dismissed at the Clerk’s Hearing, the client did not have anything put on his criminal record. After the complaint was dismissed, the Law Offices of Gerald J. Noonan petitioned the police department to reinstate the Defendant’s license to carry.

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 41 YEAR-OLD STATE EMPLOYEE WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD FOR LEAVING THE SCENE OF AN ACCIDENT WHILE CAUSING PROPERTY DAMAGE WILL BE DISMISSED OUTRIGHT IN ONE-YEAR SO LONG AS THE CLIENT STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE.

The Client was a 41-year-old state employee of Massachusetts who worked for the Department of Transportation and the Department of Children and Families and she had no criminal record. The Police Report states: A civilian witness reported that he was stopped in bumper-to-bumper traffic in Whitman when he was rear-ended by another vehicle. After the accident, the witness attempted to exchange information with the other driver, the Defendant, who refused to provide any information and then fled the scene in her vehicle. The other driver took a picture of the Defendant’s license plate and reported it to police. Police went to the Defendant’s home and observed damage to her vehicle. Defendant admitted that she was the driver and that she was in an accident. She stated that she thought she had exchanged her information but didn’t think the accident was her fault. The officer told her that she was the cause of the accident because she was following the other vehicle too closely. The Defendant became agitated and told the officer to leave her property.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented written statements of two witnesses, who were passengers in the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of this incident. Witness #1 stated that the other driver jumped out of his car and shoved the witness. The other driver became confrontational as Witness #1 took photos of the other driver’s vehicle, which did not appear to have any real damage. The other driver stated that he was going to call the police. The defendant and her party remained at the scene but the police never arrived so they left. Witness #2 confirmed that the other jumped out of his car and shoved Witness #1. Witness #2 stated that they waited at the scene for 30 minutes but the police never came. Witness #2 was recovering from recent heart surgery and requested that the Defendant take her home because she was shaken up by the event and wasn’t feeling well. The Defendant is a 41 year-old state employee who worked for the Mass. Department of Transportation and the Department of Children and Families. She had no criminal record. The issuance of the criminal complaint would have affected the Defendant’s employment with the State. After hearing, the Clerk-Magistrate decided to keep the criminal charge of Leaving the Scene of Property Damage open for one-year to be dismissed after that time so long as the Defendant stays out of trouble. The Defendant was ordered to pay $80 in fines.

DEFENDANT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF 2 OUT OF 4 FELONIES FOR CAUSING MALICIOUS DAMAGE TO PROPERTY ON 4 SEPARATE OCCASIONS, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE VICTIMS, EXCEEDED $101,000 IN DAMAGES.

Defendant, a 50-year-old resident of West Bridgewater, was charged with 4 counts of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250. Defendant worked for a company for 30 years and he was fired. After his termination, Defendant, on four separate occasions, intentionally inflicted damage to the company’s out-door industrial air chiller. The company claimed that the damage caused by the Defendant exceeded $101,000 dollars. After each act of vandalism, the company reported it to West Bridgewater Police. The company suspected that it was the Defendant who caused the damage. The company installed cameras to catch the Defendant in the act. The Defendant was caught on video causing damage to the air chiller and was arrested the following day. Prior to trial, the District Attorney’s Office offered the Defendant the following deal: Plead Guilty to all 4 felony charges of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250, be placed on probation for two years, and to pay restitution to be later determined at a hearing. Despite the evidence showing the Defendant was caught on videotape causing damage to the air chiller, and other strong evidence showing his guilt, Defendant opted to go to trial.

Result: At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan challenged the Commonwealth’s evidence that each act of vandalism caused at least $250 in damage even though the alleged victim’s claimed that the damage exceeded $100,000. With regards to 2 of the acts of vandalism, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to convince the jury that the Commonwealth failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the damage exceeded $250. Instead of taking the Commonwealth’s deal to plead guilty to all 4 felony counts, Defendant was acquitted and found Not Guilty of 2 of the felony counts. Attorney Noonan was weary to have his client plead guilty to all 4 counts because the company could use his admissions against him when they seek $101,000 in restitution from the Defendant. The Defendant was given a suspended sentence with probation for two years, a sentence not all that much different from what the Commonwealth was asking for prior to trial.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS A NOT GUILTY ON A SECOND-OFFENSE DRUNK DRIVING CASE.

The client is a 33-year-old financial consultant from Easton, MA. The police officer testified that he was stopped at a gas station when his attention was drawn to the sound of a car horn beeping for about 5 seconds. The officer followed the vehicles as they approached an intersection. The police officer observed the Defendant’s vehicle abruptly cut off the other driver causing the other vehicle to slam on its brakes and swerve to avoid a collision. The officer pulled over the Defendant’s car. When he approached the Defendant’s window, the officer observed that the Defendant’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot and he could smell an odor of alcohol on the Defendant’s breath. The officer testified that the Defendant initially stated that he did not consume any alcohol but later admitted to drinking at a strip club. The officer testified that the Defendant failed each and every field sobriety test. The officer testified that the Defendant failed the Alphabet Test twice, the Defendant failed the Nine Step Walk and Turn Test, and the Defendant failed the One-Leg Stand after attempting it twice.

Result: At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan effectively cross-examined the police officer and pointed out the inconsistencies in his testimony. Attorney Noonan pointed out everything the Defendant did well on the field sobriety tests, which the officer left out in his direct examination. Attorney Noonan introduced photos of the Defendant’s shoes to show how difficult it would be for someone to perform these field sobriety tests with this type of footwear, which had no ankle support. Attorney Noonan cross-examined the other driver and pointed out that the other driver had been speeding and he lost his patience when following the Defendant because the Defendant was not driving fast enough. Attorney Noonan called as a witness the police officer who booked the Defendant at the police station. Attorney Noonan established that the booking officer had booked the Defendant, in a small booking room, for about an hour. In a critical line of questioning, Attorney Noonan got the booking officer to testify that he could not formulate an opinion about the Defendant’s sobriety even though he had booked him for about an hour. After Attorney Noonan’s closing argument, the judge immediately found the Defendant Not Guilty. This was the Defendant’s second offense for drunk driving and he was facing possible jail time, a three year loss of license, and mandatory inpatient treatment.

FELONY DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY CHARGE AGAINST 35-YEAR-OLD COMPUTER PROGRAMMER IS DISMISSED AT CLERK MAGISTRATE’S HEARING AND NO CRIMINAL CHARGE WILL BE ON CLIENT’S RECORD.

The Police Report states: a Brockton City employee was snow plowing a residential street in Brockton when the Defendant, who was standing at the end of his driveway with a shovel, struck the City vehicle with his shovel causing $1,000 in damage to the vehicle. At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented his client’s side of the story. The Client was shoveling his driveway. The conditions were very snowy and there was poor visibility. As the client was shoveling snow at the end of his driveway, he saw a snow plow driving in his direction. The client saw that the snow plow was driving very close to the side of the street and he believed that the snow plow might drive across or into the client’s driveway. The client raised his shovel to warn the snow plow driver that he is coming too close to his driveway. As the snow plow passed by, it was very close to the client’s driveway, and as the client was holding his shovel up in the air to warn the driver, the shovel struck the side of the truck.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his client did not intend to damage the truck and only struck the truck with his shovel because he believed that the truck might hit him. At the hearing, the snow plow driver stated that the damage to his truck was $1,500 but Attorney Noonan argued that hitting the side of this heavy-duty truck with a shovel would not cause that much damage. Attorney Noonan convinced the Clerk Magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint upon the client’s payment of $250 for the damage to the truck.

BRIDGEWATER STATE UNIVERSITY STUDENT CHARGED WITH PUNCHING A FEMALE STUDENT IN THE FACE AT A PARTY WILL HAVE NO CRIMINAL RECORD SO LONG AS HE STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE FOR ONE-YEAR.

According to the Police Report, the Client, a student at Bridgewater State University, attended an off-campus party that was thrown by other students who attended the university. The alleged victim, a female BSU student, resided at the house where the off-campus party was held. She stated that the Defendant showed up the party, uninvited, and created a disturbance by arguing with the alleged victim and her roommates. The Defendant was asked to leave but he refused. He allegedly started to punch the walls and doors and he was kicked out of the house by other party-goers. As he was being kicked out of the party, the Defendant allegedly punched the female-victim in the face knocking her to the ground and causing her to have a swollen cheekbone. The Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery for punching the female victim in the face.

Result: At a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing, the female victim attended the hearing along with her father and they were both very upset about what happened. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan mediated the case by engaging in a discussion with all parties including: the alleged victim, her father, members of his client’s family, and the police department. After engaging in a constructive dialogue with all parties and getting input from everyone, all parties came to an agreement that the criminal complaint would be dismissed after one-year so long as the Client stayed out of trouble. The Client, now a senior at Salem State University and stand-out football player, will have no criminal record so long as he stays out of trouble. This was a significant victory because the Client, at this point in life, who will soon be graduating from college and entering the work force, will not have a criminal record, as he sets out to start his career.

JUDGE DISMISSES CASE WITH PREJUDICE AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THAT THE POLICE OFFICER LIED TO THE COURT.

The Defendant, a resident of Hull, was charged with Operating under the Influence of Liquor. A civilian witness reported to Hull Police that the Defendant’s vehicle crossed into his lane, struck the side of his vehicle, and continued driving without pulling over. The witness approached the Defendant at a stop sign and asked him to pull over but the Defendant continued driving for over a mile before pulling into a plaza to pick up a pizza he had ordered. The witness called the police to report the hit and run. When the police arrived to the parking lot, the officer observed that the Defendant was unsteady on his feet and appeared to be intoxicated. The officer asked the Defendant to perform a series of field sobriety tests. From the start, the Defendant, in the officer’s words, was defiant, uncooperative, and argumentative. The Defendant insulted the officer. The officer found that the Defendant failed each and every field sobriety test that he performed and placed him under arrest for OUI-Liquor and Negligent Operation. Back at the police station, when the Defendant was being booked, the arresting officer stated that the Defendant continued to be defiant, uncooperative, and argumentative. The officer stated that the Defendant claimed that he was not the operator of the vehicle when he previously admitted that he was the operator. At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan called the Booking Officer to testify as a witness. Attorney Noonan called the Booking Officer to impeach the testimony of the arresting officer. During booking, the Booking Officer observed that the Defendant’s speech was “fair,” which contradicted the arresting officer’s observation that the Defendant’s speech was thick-tongued and slurred. More importantly, the Booking Officer observed that the Defendant’s “attitude was indifferent” and there were “no unusual actions” by the Defendant, which contradicted the arresting officer’s repeated assertions that the Defendant was defiant, argumentative, uncooperative, and insulting. As the trial started, the District Attorney received word that the Booking Officer could not appear to the trial because he was “sick.” Attorney Noonan asked for a continuance of the trial because the Booking Officer was an important witness for the defense. When the Defendant left the courthouse and was driving home, he saw the Booking Officer performing a detail and directing traffic. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss with prejudice on the grounds that the Booking Officer lied to the court when he represented that he was out sick when, in actuality, he was not sick but performing a paid detail. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained documentation showing that the Booking Officer performed a paid detail on the day of trial from 7:00 AM to 8:30 PM for 13.5 hours.

Result: After Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence to show that the booking officer lied to the court, the Judge dismissed the OUI-Liquor charge, with prejudice, and found that the booking officer’s conduct was egregious. The case was dismissed with prejudice meaning that the Commonwealth cannot charge the Defendant with the same offense in the future. This is a rare case where a Judge dismissed a criminal charge with prejudice as a sanction for egregious police misconduct.

FELONY CHARGES AGAINST UN-EMPLOYED SINGLE MOTHER WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD WILL BE DISMISSED OUTRIGHT SO LONG AS THE CLIENT STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE FOR ONE-YEAR.

According to the Police Report, the alleged victim went to the police department to report that the Defendant, her grandson’s girlfriend, had stolen two checks from her home, fraudulently made both checks out to herself, forged the alleged victim’s name, and cashed both checks, causing the alleged victim to have a negative balance in her checking account. The Defendant was charged Larceny over $250, a felony, and Uttering a False Check, also a felony.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinced the District Attorney to dismiss all charges so long as his Client pays restitution and stays out of trouble for one-year. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that his Client, a 28 year-old un-employed, single mother, stole the checks only because she was under great mental and emotional stress, as she was struggling to financially support her child. The client had no criminal record. She was very remorseful for what she did and deserving of a second chance. The client has already paid the restitution and the charges will be dismissed outright so long as she stays out of trouble for one year.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES CLERK-MAGISTRATE TO DISMISS GUN CHARGES AGAINST LOCAL RESTAURANT OWNER.

Client, a 41 year-old owner of a local restaurant and resident of Abington, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm and Failure to Surrender his Firearms to Police. The Police Report alleged: Abington Police were dispatched to the Client’s residence for a domestic dispute with his girlfriend. The Client had a valid License to Carry Firearms (LTC). When the police arrived to his residence, the Client responsibly informed the Police that he legally owned and possessed an AR-15 Assault Rifle and a .40 Caliber Smith and Wesson handgun. Prior to the police arriving, the Client placed all his firearms on his kitchen table so that the police were made aware that he possessed guns in his home. When the domestic dispute was resolved, the police instructed the Client to secure his firearms. As the client was securing his firearms, the police observed that the AR-15 Assault Rifle was not properly secured, as it was not in a secured container or equipped with a trigger lock. As a result, the police informed the Client that he would be charged with Improper Storage of the Firearm. As he was being charged with a firearms offense, the Client was required by law to surrender all his firearms to the police. The Client failed to promptly surrender his firearms to the police and was charged with that offense as well.

Result: The Client received notice that he would be arraigned in court on the gun charges. If he were arraigned, the gun charges would go on the Client’s criminal record. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss the case prior to his Client’s arraignment on the grounds that his Client was entitled to a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing prior to being arraigned. The charges were dismissed prior to arraignment and the Client was given his right to a Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing. At the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his Client had his Assault Rifle trigger-locked prior to the police arriving to his home. The trigger lock was on his nightstand in his bedroom but the Client forgot to trigger-lock the rifle when the police were watching him secure his firearms. The Client forgot to trigger lock his rifle because he was nervous when the police were watching him secure his firearms. With regards to the charge of Failure to Surrender his Firearms, Attorney Noonan showed that his Client surrendered his firearms less than 48 hours after the police instructed him to. After taking Attorney Noonan’s arguments into consideration, the Clerk Magistrate dismissed all charges thereby saving his client from having any criminal charges on his record.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THAT THE STATE POLICE UNLAWFULLY DETAINED HIS CLIENT AT A DRUNK-DRIVING ROADBLOCK, WHICH RESULTED IN THE DISMISSAL OF THE CASE EVEN THOUGH HIS CLIENT HAD A BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT OF 0.81%.

On May 28, 2016, the State Police were conducting an OUI Roadblock, as referred to as a Sobriety Checkpoint, on Route 18 in Abington. The Client, who was returning from a wedding, approached the checkpoint in his vehicle. At the checkpoint, the State Trooper believed that the Client was exhibiting signs of intoxication so he had the client get out of his car and submit to field sobriety tests. The State Trooper found that the client failed three of the field sobriety tests. The State Trooper had the client blow into a portable breath test device, which showed that the client had a blood alcohol content of 0.81%, which is above the legal limit in Massachusetts. The State Trooper then arrested the client and charged with Operating under the Influence of Liquor.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that his Client was unlawfully detained by the State Trooper. Specifically, Attorney Noonan argued that the State Trooper did not have enough evidence to order his Client to get out of his vehicle and submit to the field sobriety tests. At a Hearing in which the State Trooper testified, Attorney Noonan proved that the only evidence of possible intoxication that led the Trooper to detain his client was the Trooper’s observation that the Client’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot. Attorney Noonan introduced a color copy of the Client’s booking photo, which clearly showed that his Client did not have glassy or bloodshot eyes. The Judge agreed with Attorney Noonan that the State Trooper did not have enough evidence to detain his client. Therefore, the Judge suppressed all evidence that was obtained as a result of his Client’s unlawful detention, which included all field sobriety tests and the breath test result of 0.81%. Because the majority of the evidence was suppressed, the District Attorney was forced to dismiss the case.

FELONY LARCENY CHARGE AGAINST MECHANIC FROM CARVER IS REDUCED TO A MISDEMEANOR UPON PROOF BY THE DEFENSE THAT THE VALUE OF STOLEN PROPERTY WAS UNDER $250.

Client, a 48 year-old Mechanic from Carver, was arrested at the Sears Department Store in the Braintree Mall for allegedly stealing merchandise with his wife. The Loss Prevention Department at Sears observed the Client and his Wife conceal merchandise in a shopping bag. The Security Guard observed the wife try on a Lands End Jacket and hand it to the Client who then walked out of the store without paying for the Lands End Jacket. The Client’s wife walked out of the store with stolen merchandise in her shopping bag. According to the Police Report, the value of all the stolen items was $346.98. The Client was charged with Larceny over $250, which is a felony. What distinguishes a felony larceny from a misdemeanor larceny is the value of the stolen items. If the value of the stolen items is over $250, it is a felony.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan conducted an investigation and contacted the Loss Prevention Department at Sears and discovered that the value of the Lands End Jacket, stolen by the client, was $169.00. Attorney Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss the felony Larceny over $250 charge on the grounds that the evidence discovered by the defense showed that the value of the stolen item was under $250. The District Attorney agreed to reduce the felony to a misdemeanor.

FINANCIAL ADVISOR FACING MANDATORY 60-DAYS IN JAIL AND A 1 YEAR LOSS OF LICENSE HAS CASE DISMISSED ON FIRST COURT DATE.

Client, a 33 year-old financial advisor from Easton, was pulled over by State Police for a motor vehicle infraction. Client had a prior conviction for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol (OUI). In addition, prior to being pulled over in this case, Client had been arrested for a Second-Offense OUI. When the Client was pulled over in this case, his driver license was suspended for 180 days because he refused the Breathalyzer Test when he was arrested for the second-offense OUI. The Client was arrested and charged with Operating with a Suspended License while his License was suspended for OUI pursuant to G.L. c. 90, § 23 and, if convicted for this offense, the Client was facing a mandatory jail sentence of 60 days and a 1-year mandatory loss of license.

Result: On the first court date, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinced the Judge and the Assistant District Attorney to dismiss the charge upon the payment of court costs and Attorney Noonan saved his client from serving 60 days in jail and having a 1-year loss of license.

CLIENT, A MICHIGAN RESIDENT, WHO WAS CHARGED WITH 15 COUNTS OF LARCENY, FORGING CHECKS AND UTTERING FALSE CHECKS HIRED ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN WHO GOT ALL CHARGES DROPPED UPON THE PAYMENT OF RESTITUTION AND THE CLIENT DIDN’T HAVE TO APPEAR IN COURT.

The Client, a resident of Michigan, was in Massachusetts on business and he went to the Staples Store in Woburn. Client wrote 5 checks to purchase gift cards. The 5 checks were all for amounts of around $100.00. After completing the transactions, the store manager approached the Defendant to speak to him about the checks but the Defendant fled the store. The store manager was able to get the license plate of the defendant’s vehicle, as it fled the store. An investigation by Woburn Police revealed that the Defendant forged a false name on the checks. Police located the Defendant in Michigan where he was currently on probation for committing similar larcenies and forgeries.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan contacted the District Attorney’s Office and was able to reach an agreement where the Commonwealth would agree to drop all charges so long as the Defendant paid Staples restitution. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan provided the District Attorney with proof that his client paid Staples the restitution they were owed. The Commonwealth dropped all charges and the Defendant did not even have to appear in court.

Docket No.: 1315 CR 5197

CHARGES AGAINST BROCKTON MAN FOR HITTING VICTIM IN THE HEAD WITH A BASEBALL BAT ARE DISMISSED AS THE TRIAL WAS UNDERWAY.

On 09/09/13, Brockton Police were called to Panorama Pizza in Brockton for a report of a male bleeding profusely from his head after being struck in the head with a baseball bat. Upon arrival, police observed trails of blood in the parking lot and large pools of blood inside Panorama Pizza. The Defendant, a 29 year-old pizza delivery man, admitted to police that he struck the victim in the head with a baseball bat but that it was in self-defense. Due to the severity of the head injury and the amount of blood loss, the victim was taken by helicopter to the hospital in Boston where he stayed for almost one week.

The Defendant was charged with Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon (G.L. c. 265, §15A), a felony offense punishable up to 10 years in state prison.

The Noonan Defense Team thoroughly prepared the case for trial where they intended to assert that the Defendant was justified in using deadly force in self-defense. The Defendant and the victim were employees at Panorama Pizza in Brockton. The Noonan Defense Team interviewed the other employees at the pizza shop and intended to have all three employees testify at trial. At the trial, the Commonwealth moved to introduce a surveillance video, which showed the Defendant strike the victim in the head with the baseball bat.

Attorney Patrick J. Noonan sought to introduce the following evidence at trial: The pizza shop employees would testify that the victim had a reputation for being a violent and quarrelsome person. The employees would testify that the victim would show up to the pizza shop on a regular basis highly intoxicated and would act aggressively toward the employees. The employees would testify to approximately 10 instances where the victim would threaten to cause bodily harm to the Defendant. The employees would testify to an incident where the victim threatened a police officer and was almost arrested. Finally, the employees would testify to an incident that occurred at 8:00 p.m. just one hour before the assault in question where the victim showed up to the pizza shop highly intoxicated and made threats to the manager and the Defendant. Despite the efforts of the manager and the Defendant, the victim refused to leave and go home. The victim remained outside the pizza shop where he proceeded to stare at the Defendant in a threatening manner. At the top of his lungs, the victim screamed threats to cause bodily harm to the Defendant. The victim leaned against the Defendant’s car and waited for him to come outside knowing that the Defendant would eventually have to go to his car to deliver pizzas. Fearing that the victim would physically attack him, the Defendant called the police to have the victim removed from the premises. The police arrived and removed the victim from the premises.

One hour after being removed from the premises by the police, the victim returned to the pizza shop where he confronted the Defendant in the parking lot. As the Defendant was exiting his car, he observed the victim quickly approaching him in an aggressive manner. Fearing that the victim was about to attack him, the Defendant grabbed a miniature-sized baseball bat that he kept in his car for protection. The victim got in the Defendant’s face and made threats to “kill him.” Prior to using the bat in self-defense, the Defendant pushed the victim back and yelled for him to “back up” but the victim continued with his threats to kill him. With no other alternative and having a legitimate fear that the victim would seriously harm him, the Defendant struck the victim in the head with the baseball bat. The victim was completely unfazed by the blow to the head and continued to pursue the Defendant who then ran inside the pizza shop for safety.

Attorney Patrick J. Noonan intended to call an expert witness in Toxicology and Physiology. The expert witness would testify that the victim had a blood alcohol level of 0.24 when he showed up to the pizza shop at 8:00 p.m. and that the victim had a blood alcohol level of 0.22 when he showed up an hour later and confronted the Defendant in the parking lot. The expert witness would also testify as to the signs and symptoms that a person exhibits in this state of intoxication, which include: exaggerated emotional states (such as rage), emotional instability, loss of critical judgment, and increased pain threshold.

At the start of the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued a Motion in Limine to introduce evidence of the victim’s violent character and to introduce six specific instances of violence committed by the victim. The DA objected and moved to exclude each of the six instances of violence committed by the victim. After a hearing, the trial judge ruled that Attorney Noonan could introduce 4 of the 6 instances of violence committed by the victim. In addition, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan moved to introduce testimony from his expert as to the level of the victim’s intoxication along with the mental state and behavior associated with such a high level of intoxication. Again, the DA objected and moved to exclude the expert from testifying. After a hearing, the trial judge ruled that Attorney Noonan could introduce the proposed testimony from his expert.

Result: After the hearing in which the trial judge ruled that Attorney Patrick J. Noonan could introduce evidence of the victim’s violent character, the four specific instances of violence committed by the victim, and the expert testimony as to the victim’s high level of intoxication, the DA moved to dismiss the case before the jury was empaneled.

“Man beaten with baseball bat outside Brockton pizza shop.” http://www.wcvb.com/article/man-beaten-with-baseball-bat-outside-brockton-pizza-shop/8188389

CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST PARALEGAL ARE DISMISSED AS ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN PRESENTS ALIBI EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS SOMEWHERE ELSE AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME.

State Police were dispatched to the scene of a motor vehicle crash on Route 24. Upon arrival, the officer spoke to a woman who was the victim of a hit and run accident. Upon arrival, the officer observed that the victim was in distress.

The victim stated that she was rear-ended by a black SUV. The female operator of the black SUV approached the victim to inquire if she was injured to which the victim stated that she was injured. The female operator then fled the scene. The victim described the female operator as having black curly hair and light skin.

The officer observed significant rear-end damage to the victim’s vehicle especially damage to the vehicle’s rear hatchback. The victim told the officer that she suffered injuries to her head, neck, and back. The victim was taken by ambulance to the emergency room. A couple days later, the victim contacted the officer and told him that she found the other vehicle’s license plate inside the rear of her hatch-back. The officer ran the vehicle’s license plate, which came back to the Defendant. The officer printed out the Defendant’s driver’s license photo and presented a photo array to the victim. Without hesitation, the victim identified the Defendant’s picture as the woman who hit her vehicle and fled the scene. The State Police filed applications for criminal complaints against the Defendant for: Leaving the Scene of an Accident causing Personal Injury. The Defendant was a paralegal at a reputable law firm.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented certified hospital records showing that the Defendant was a patient in the hospital at the time of the hit and run accident so the Defendant could not have the perpetrator. After presenting this alibi evidence, the Clerk-Magistrate dismissed the criminal complaint.

CHARGES DISMISSED AT TRIAL AS ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN MOVES THE COURT TO HAVE THE ALLEGED VICTIM EVALUATED FOR A FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION.

Defendant was arrested for strangling or suffocating his mother and violently assaulting her with a dangerous weapon. Defendant had a lengthy history of psychiatric hospitalizations and severe mental health disorders. At his arraignment, Defendant was involuntarily committed to a mental health facility for a competency and criminal responsibility evaluation. The forensic evaluator determined that the Defendant was competent to stand trial. The forensic evaluator had a conflicting opinion as to whether the Defendant was criminally responsible for his actions or whether he lacked criminal responsibility for his actions due to his mental illness. As a result, the issue of criminal responsibility was an uncertainty heading into trial.

Result: Through his pretrial investigation, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan discovered evidence that the alleged victim may have committed a crime during the alleged incident. On the day of trial, the alleged victim appeared ready to testify against the Defendant. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan moved the Court to appoint an Attorney to evaluate the alleged victim to see if she had a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. That is, to see whether the alleged victim would incriminate herself if she were to testify against the Defendant. After evaluating the alleged victim, the Attorney reported to the court that the alleged victim had a valid Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. As a result, the alleged victim invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege and decided not to testify against the Defendant. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan moved to dismiss the case arguing that the Commonwealth could not prove its case without the testimony of the alleged victim.

NO CRIMINAL COMPLAINT ISSUED AGAINST 19 YEAR-OLD GIRL WHO ADMITTED TO SHOPLIFTING NECKLACE FROM KOHLS DEPARTMENT STORE.

Defendant was a 19 year-old recent high school honors graduate from New Jersey who admitted to shoplifting a necklace from the Kohl’s Department Store in Seekonk. Seekonk Police received a call from the Loss Prevention Department at Kohl’s Department Store reporting that two females left the store in a vehicle after shoplifting items. A police officer stopped the vehicle. Loss prevention officers from Kohl’s went to the scene of the vehicle stop and identified the driver and the passenger (defendant) as the females who stole items from the store. The Defendant and the other female were seen on a surveillance video as leaving the store with stolen items. The Defendant admitted to stealing a $16.00 necklace while the other female admitted to stealing $130.00 in merchandise.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that the Defendant was a recent high school graduate who finished her senior year with near straight A’s and was also a member of the National Honor Society. Attorney Noonan also presented a letter from the Defendant’s high school Social Studies teacher who attested to her character and work ethic. In addition, Attorney Noonan presented a certificate in recognition of the Defendant’s volunteer work. Lastly, Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant was in the process of applying to colleges and a criminal charge on her record would affect her education, career opportunities, and her future. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that the Defendant made an error in judgment and deserved a second chance. The Clerk-Magistrate dismissed the criminal complaint and Attorney Gerald J. Noonan saved his 19 year-old client from having a criminal charge on her record.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN CONVINCES A JUDGE TO VACATE AN OLD CONVICTION FOR A CRIME AGAINST THE PUBLIC JUSTICE AND THEN SUCCESSFULLY PETITIONS THE COMMISSIONER OF PROBATION TO SEAL IT FROM HIS CLIENT’S RECORD.

Client is a 70 year-old accountant, grandmother, and former drug-addict who had an old felony conviction from 1984 for smuggling drugs into a prison. The client had turned her life around but was always haunted by her past. Back in the 1980s, client had a terrible drug addiction. In 1984, she was arrested for attempting to smuggle cocaine into a prison for an inmate. She was convicted of the serious felony offense of Giving a Prisoner a Controlled Substance. That was the last time the client ever had any involvement with police or the court system. She committed herself to treatment and lived a life of sobriety ever since. She went back to school and earned a degree in Accounting and graduated at the top of her class with Highest Honors. She has been employed as an Accountant for over 30 years and has held the same job for nearly 15 years. Despite the remarkable turnaround in her life, she was always haunted by her old felony conviction, which was a constant reminder of her past. She petitioned the Commissioner of Probation in Boston to seal the felony conviction from her record. Regrettably, she was informed that the conviction was non-sealable because it was a Crime against the Public Justice. Her only hope was to have the felony conviction vacated, which she believed was impossible. Other attorneys told her that convincing a judge to vacate a conviction for this charge would be very difficult. In a leap of faith, she contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan who agreed to take on the case.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan made a compelling argument to a Judge of the Brockton District Court to vacate his client’s felony conviction. In a rare case, the Judge entered an order and vacated a conviction for a Crime against the Public Justice. With the conviction vacated, the Commissioner of Probation agreed to seal the charge from the client’s record.

Docket No.: 1515 CR 0403

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN CONVINCES JUDGE TO ORDER DRUG TREATMENT INSTEAD OF JAIL TIME FOR MAN WHO OVERDOSED ON HEROIN WITH AUTISTIC CHILD IN CAR.

Brockton Police were dispatched to the Mobile Gas Station in Brockton for a report of a male who had overdosed in his car with a small child in the backseat. When officers arrived, Defendant was slumped over the steering wheel with the engine running, the car in gear, and the car in reverse. Officers had to smash the window to gain access to the Defendant who was unconscious. Defendant had overdosed after injecting himself with heroin. Officers had to administer two separate doses of the overdose-reversing drug Narcan in order to revive the Defendant. The Defendant’s 10 year-old severely autistic son was in the backseat. The child was unable to speak due to his severe autism. Police found heroin and syringes in the car. The heroin was tested and found to contain the highly volatile substance Fentanyl. The Defendant admitted to police that he drove to the gas station and that he consumed heroin. Defendant was charged with: Operating under the Influence of Drugs, Child Endangerment, and Possession of Fentanyl.

Result: The case was un-triable, as the Commonwealth would have little difficulty proving its case. Attorney Noonan had no alternative but to plea his client out. The District Attorney asked the Judge to lock the Defendant up for 90 days. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan requested that his client be given a suspended sentence, instead of jail time, and placed on probation for three years with conditions aimed at treating his drug addiction. The Judge agreed with Attorney Noonan and imposed a suspended sentence of 6 months with three years of probation and conditions of drug treatment.

“Brockton overdosed driver avoids jail time in favor of treatment.” http://saugus.wickedlocal.com/news/20170224/brockton-overdosed-driver-avoids-jail-time-in-favor-of-treatment

DOMESTIC ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGE AGAINST MBTA WORKER DISMISSED AT TRIAL.

Rockland Police were dispatched to a residence in Rockland in response to a 911 call from the Defendant’s girlfriend who reported that her boyfriend, the Defendant, had hit her in the face with an open hand several times. She alleged that the Defendant made vulgar statements toward her. Prior to calling 911, Defendant allegedly pounded his fist against the door to the home scaring the girlfriend and her 15 year-old daughter. When she was calling 911, Defendant made threatening statements to her. The girlfriend remained on the phone with 911 until police arrived. When police arrived, the girlfriend had locked herself inside her home and locked the Defendant out of the house. At the scene, the officer observed redness to the left side of the girlfriend’s face consistent with being recently struck in the face. When police arrived, Defendant was outside the home in the driveway. After speaking to the girlfriend, police arrested the Defendant who made no statements to police. After his arrest, the girlfriend made a written statement to the police regarding the abuse and later obtained an Abuse Prevention Restraining Order against the Defendant.

Attorney Gerald J. Noonan prepared the case for trial. Attorney Noonan obtained a transcript of the restraining order hearing where the girlfriend stated, under oath, that the Defendant did not hit her. In addition, Attorney Noonan obtained, by court order, statements the girlfriend made to the DA’s Office in which she stated, again, that the Defendant did not hit her.

Result: On the date of trial, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was ready to try the case and ready to exclude the 911 call from evidence along with other hearsay statements made by the girlfriend. In addition, Attorney Noonan was ready to introduce statements made by the girlfriend in which she stated that the Defendant did not hit her. On the day of trial, the DA moved to dismiss.

CHARGES AGAINST JUVENILE FOR JOY-RIDING A VEHICLE WITHOUT A DRIVER’S LICENSE AND CAUSING A SERIOUS ACCIDENT RESULTING IN INJURIES TO A PREGNANT WOMAN ARE DISMISSED AT CLERK MAGISTRATE’S HEARING.

Client was a 15 year-old high school honor student who did not have a driver’s license. The client took a motor vehicle on a joy-ride without the owner’s permission and caused a serious motor vehicle accident resulting in injuries to a pregnant driver and her infant child. The client smashed into another vehicle. The other vehicle was being operated by a woman who was three-months pregnant with her infant child riding in the backseat. Due to the severity of the crash, the pregnant woman and her infant child were injured and taken to the emergency room.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was successful in having all criminal complaints dismissed at a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing. Attorney Noonan argued that the client was suffering from major depression due to serious head injuries she sustained in a prior motor vehicle accident. Attorney Noonan argued that his client’s decision in taking the vehicle for a joy-ride was the result of the bad mental state she was in. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that his client is receiving psychological treatment and has greatly improved. Attorney Noonan argued that this was an isolated incident and totally out of character for his client who was an honors student. The Clerk-Magistrate dismissed all criminal complaints and no charges were entered on client’s record.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN SAVES HIS CLIENT FROM SERVING ONE YEAR IN JAIL FOR COMMITTING NEW CRIMES IN VIOLATION OF HIS PROBATION.

The Defendant went to Market Basket in Brockton and did some shopping. He placed groceries into his shopping basket, which included cereal, cold cuts, milk and eggs. At the service desk, Defendant put his shopping basket down and purchased some cigarettes using a gift card. After purchasing the cigarettes, Defendant picked up shopping basket and exited the store without paying for the groceries in his shopping basket. A security guard apprehended the Defendant outside and brought him back into the store. Defendant returned the shopping basket. Defendant allegedly assaulted the security guard by pushing him and the Defendant allegedly ran out of the store and fled the scene in his vehicle. The loss prevention department pulled video footage of the Defendant fleeing in his vehicle. Brockton Police ran the vehicle’s registration, which came back to the Defendant. Brockton Police showed the security guard the Defendant’s driver’s license photo. The security guard identified the Defendant as the person who left the store without paying for his groceries and the security guard identified the Defendant as the person who assaulted him.

Defendant had a prior criminal record, which included serving one year in jail for Breaking & Entering and stealing $6,000. At the time of this Clerk’s Hearing, Defendant was serving a suspended sentence for Larceny and Receiving Stolen Property.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that the Defendant did not intentionally steal the groceries but mistakenly left with the shopping basket after paying for his cigarettes. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant cooperated with the security guard, explained that he forgot to pay for the groceries, and offered to pay for the groceries. Attorney Noonan argued that the security guard was the aggressor and that the security guard put his hands on the Defendant and the Defendant responded by pushing the security guard away. The Defendant then left the store feeling as though he had been mistreated. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was successful in having all criminal complaints dismissed. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan saved his client from serving one year in jail because the issuance of these criminal complaints would be a violation of his suspended sentence.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS AGGRAVATED FELONY DISMISSED AGAINST HIS CLIENT FOR WHOOPING HIS 6 YEAR-OLD STEP-SON WITH A BELT – AND SAVES HIS CLIENT FROM BEING DEPORTED FROM U.S.

Defendant was charged with an aggravated felony. The allegations were that the Defendant physically abused his 6 year-old step-son with a belt. Teachers noticed that the child had bruises and marks on his arm. When asked about the injuries, the child stated that his step-father whooped him with a belt. The child stated that his step-father was about to whoop him on the butt with a belt but he (child) was struck on the arm when he tried to block the belt from hitting his butt. The school took pictures of the child’s left arm, which had marks and bruises on it. Defendant admitted to hitting his step-son with the belt but only did so to discipline the child for his misbehavior.

From the very beginning of the case, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan asserted the defense of parental privilege, a newly recognized defense, and argued that his client was justified in using reasonable force to discipline his step-son.

In Commonwealth v. Dorvil, 472 Mass. 1 (2015), the Supreme Judicial Court recognized parental privilege as a new defense. It states that: a parent may not be criminally liable for the use of force against a minor in his care if the force used: (1) is reasonable, (2) is reasonably related to the purpose of “safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the minor,” including the punishment of the minor’s misconduct, and (3) “neither causes, nor creates a substantial risk of causing, physical harm (beyond fleeting pain or minor, transient marks), gross degradation, or severe mental distress.”

At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was prepared to prove that his client’s physical discipline of his step-son was reasonable and met the criteria of Dorvil. First, Attorney Noonan sought to show that the physical discipline was justified to punish the child’s misbehavior. The child had been misbehaving in school, repeatedly, and his misbehavior was escalating. At first, Defendant and his wife did not use any force to discipline the child and instead disciplined the child in other ways but the child continued to misbehave. After exhausting all other forms of discipline, Defendant used force. Second, Attorney Noonan sought to show that the force used was reasonable. Defendant did not pull down the child’s pants with the intent to spank him on his bare-bottom. Nor did the Defendant whoop him repeatedly with the belt. Nor did the Defendant use excessive force. Instead, Defendant lightly spanked the child with the belt at least two times. Third, Attorney Noonan sought to show that the whooping did not cause or create a substantial risk of causing physical harm (beyond fleeting pain or minor, transient marks). Specifically, the photos showed light, faint, and small bruises to the child’s arm, which fully healed after several days. Thus, the physical harm did not extend beyond fleeting pain or minor, transient marks. Lastly, Attorney Noonan sought to show that the force did not cause or create severe mental distress. Specifically, in counseling sessions (subsequent to the incident), the child was found to be happy, healthy, and in no distress. In fact, the child told counselors that he loved his step-father and exhibited great affection for this step-father.

On the day of trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan consulted with the District Attorney as to whether the child was competent to testify – and whether the child would be traumatized or harmed should he be forced to testify against his step-father – and whether it was in child’s best interest to testify against his step-father. Attorney Noonan and the DA interviewed the child to address these and other issues. After interviewing the child, the DA decided to dismiss the case.

Defendant was not a U.S. citizen. Since this was an aggravated felony, Defendant faced deportation if convicted.  Immigration and Nationality Act § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) provides that “any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable.” The consequences of a conviction would be devastating for the Defendant. If convicted, Defendant may be detained without bond and will be deported as expeditiously as possible. An aggravated felon is “conclusively presumed” to be deportable and is also rendered ineligible for virtually all forms of relief from removal. A person deported as an aggravated felon may be banned from the U.S. for life.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to get the aggravated felony dismissed saving his client from the very real prospect of being deported from the U.S.

Client is a 51-year-old Electrical Engineer from Taunton who is married with three children. Client has been an avid hunter and shooter and a big believer in the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Guns have been a part of his life since he was a young kid. At age 16, he was issued a Firearms Identification Card. Client has had a License to Carry since 1995. He had been an active member of the National Rifle Association (NRA), the Gun Owner’s Action League of Massachusetts (GOAL), and Taunton Rifle and Pistol Club. He has advanced training in firearms. He is a member of Team Glock a competitive team of shooting professionals.

Since 1995, the client has had a License to Carry (LTC) but in 2016 the Police Department denied his Application to Renew his LTC because he had a conviction for a firearms offense. Specifically, the Client pled guilty to the offense of Leaving a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle. According to the Police Department, the conviction disqualified the client from getting an LTC.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan petitioned the Chief of Police to renew his client’s license to carry firearms. Under the law, a conviction for a violation of any firearms law disqualifies an applicant from getting an LTC. Here, Client’s LTC renewal was denied because he had a conviction for violating a firearms law. However, Attorney Noonan pointed out that: in order for a firearms violation to be a disqualifier, the firearms violation must carry a penalty of imprisonment. In his client’s case, the only punishment his client received for the firearms violation was a fine of $125.00. After considering Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s arguments, the client’s license to carry firearms was renewed.