Case Results
Commonwealth v. John Doe
VIOLATION OF AN ABUSE PREVENTION ORDER DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE ON A SUCCESSFUL DEFENSE OF ACCIDENT.
The client had a clerk-magistrate hearing on an application for criminal complaint alleging one count of Violation of an Abuse Prevention Order (G.L. c. 209A, §7) stemming from an allegation that the client made a phone call to the subject of the order in violation of the no-contact provision of the order. At the clerk-magistrate hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully argued that the client’s phone call was not intentional, but accidental. The victim received a missed phone call from the client at approximately 6:00 a.m. Attorney Noonan introduced evidence that the client accidentally called the victim’s phone number. After the hearing, the clerk dismissed the complaint after three months.
Commonwealth v. Jane Doe – Taunton District Court
CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS FOR THREE-COUNTS OF IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST REGISTERED NURSE DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
The client is a registered nurse. She has no criminal record. She has a valid license to carry firearms. The police were dispatched to her home for a wellness check on her boyfriend. When the police entered the home, they observed three firearms, which were not stored in a securely locked container or affixed with a trigger lock. The client was charged with three-counts of Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L). This offense is very easy to prove. The Commonwealth need only prove that there was a working firearm that was not properly secured in either a locked container or affixed with a tamper-resistant lock or other safety device. Here, there was no doubt that the client committed the offenses charged. As a licensed nurse, any criminal offenses on her record would result in a suspension of her nursing license and termination from employment. At the clerk-magistrate’s hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the clerk to dismiss the complaints after one year, so long as the client does not get into any trouble, which shouldn’t be any trouble for this client, who is a stellar person.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Barnstable Superior Court
8 INDICTMENTS FOR AGGRAVATED RAPE OF A CHILD, CARRYING LIFE SENTENCE, DISMISSED AT TRIAL.
Our client was charged with eight (8) counts of Aggravated Statutory Rape of a Child (G.L. c. 265, §23A) and two (2) counts of Indecent Assault & Battery on a child. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan spent years preparing the case for trial. One week before the trial, the Commonwealth dropped all charges. If convicted, the client was facing a life sentence.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Brockton District Court
ASSAULT CHARGES AGAINST BRINKS EMPLOYEE DISMISSED, CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS IS REINSTATED, AND CLIENT RETURNS TO WORK.
Our client was employed as an armed security guard for Brinks, which requires him to possess a valid License to Carry Firearms. Brockton Police were dispatched to the residence of the client’s girlfriend, who reported that the client barged into her house and confronted her about having an affair with another man, who was also present in the home. The girlfriend claimed that the client struck her, threw her to the ground, and broke her fingernails. She also reported that the client had physically assaulted her, approximately one year ago, and she provided police with photographs of her injuries. During the altercation with the girlfriend, the client was also alleged to have physically assaulted the girlfriend’s male friend, by punching in the face. The client was charged with two counts of Assault & Battery upon his girlfriend and one-count of Assault & Battery on the male party (G.L. c. 265, §13A). Upon the issuance of the criminal charges, the client’s license to carry firearms was suspended and he was placed on leave from Brinks. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan immediately took the case to trial, all charges were dismissed, his LTC was reinstated, and the client has returned to work at Brinks.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Plymouth Superior Court
INDICTMENT CHARGING DRUGGING A PERSON FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE.
Our client was indicted for Rape and Drugging a Person for Sexual Intercourse (G.L. c. 272, §3). The client met a woman on social media, and they got together for a date. They went to a bar for a few drinks. The woman was insistent that the client placed something in her drink at the bar and she had no memory of what occurred thereafter. Upon leaving the bar, they went to the woman’s apartment. She awoke the next morning and believed that she had been raped. She went to the hospital. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of probable cause because, absent her allegation, there was no evidence to show that she had been drugged. The indictment was dismissed.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Plymouth Superior Court
INDICTMENT CHARGING DRUGGING A PERSON FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE.
Our client was indicted for Rape and Drugging a Person for Sexual Intercourse (G.L. c. 272, §3). The client met a woman on social media, and they got together for a date. They went to a bar for a few drinks. The woman was insistent that the client placed something in her drink at the bar and she had no memory of what occurred thereafter. Upon leaving the bar, they went to the woman’s apartment. She awoke the next morning and believed that she had been raped. She went to the hospital. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of probable cause because, absent her allegation, there was no evidence to show that she had been drugged. The indictment was dismissed.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Brockton District Court
ASSAULT & BATTERY DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
The client had a heated dispute with a contractor. The client hired the contractor to build him a new front porch. As part of the agreement, the contractor was required to remove all debris. However, the contractor never removed the debris, material, or trash, so the client paid to have the debris removed. When the contractor requested payment, the client stated that he would pay the bill, minus the money he paid to have the debris removed. The contractor and his son showed up to the client’s house at 9:00 p.m. unannounced, demanding full payment. In this heated confrontation, the contractor called the police and reported that the defendant pushed him. The police charged the client with Assault & Battery (G.L. c. 265, §13A). At the clerk’s hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence that the contractor and his son were the aggressors. When they were banging on his front door, at 9:00 p.m. at night, they startled and scared the client’s young children. When the client refused to pay the entire bill, the contractor and his son attempted to barge into the house, but the client pushed them away. The client took out his phone and said that he was calling the police at which time the contractor grabbed his phone and threw it. The contractor and his son committed an assault on the client. During this contentious hearing, the clerk decided to dismiss the complaint. The client had no record.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Brockton District Court
ASSAULT & BATTERY DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
The client had a heated dispute with a contractor. The client hired the contractor to build him a new front porch. As part of the agreement, the contractor was required to remove all debris. However, the contractor never removed the debris, material, or trash, so the client paid to have the debris removed. When the contractor requested payment, the client stated that he would pay the bill, minus the money he paid to have the debris removed. The contractor and his son showed up to the client’s house at 9:00 p.m. unannounced, demanding full payment. In this heated confrontation, the contractor called the police and reported that the defendant pushed him. The police charged the client with Assault & Battery (G.L. c. 265, §13A). At the clerk’s hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence that the contractor and his son were the aggressors. When they were banging on his front door, at 9:00 p.m. at night, they startled and scared the client’s young children. When the client refused to pay the entire bill, the contractor and his son attempted to barge into the house, but the client pushed them away. The client took out his phone and said that he was calling the police at which time the contractor grabbed his phone and threw it. The contractor and his son committed an assault on the client. During this contentious hearing, the clerk decided to dismiss the complaint. The client had no record.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
AFTER VIGOROUS CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ATTORNEY NOONAN, JUDGE TOSSES ABUSE PREVENTION ORDER.
The client’s wife took out an emergency abuse prevention order against him, also known as a 209A order. A two-party hearing was held on the Plaintiff’s request to extend the restraining order for one year. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan conducted an effective cross-examination of the Plaintiff, discrediting her allegations, undermining her credibility, and highlighting the absurdity of her claims. Attorney Noonan had three witnesses prepared to testify to impeach the Plaintiff’s allegations. These witnesses were also prepared to testify regarding the Plaintiff’s mental health issues. However, after Attorney Noonan’s cross-examination, the judge heard enough the terminated the restraining order.
Plaintiff v. Police Department
SUSPENSION OF LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS FOR ALLEGED MENTAL ILLNESS REVERSED.
The client was venting during a therapy session and made certain statements that her therapist found alarming. The therapist, knowing that the client had a license to carry firearms and owned a firearm, reported the client’s statements to the police. The police then sectioned the client, and she was brought to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. The police immediately suspended her LTC. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence that the client’s statements were taken out of context, were blown out of proportion, and she was simply venting over a stressful family situation. The records from the hospital indicated that the client’s statements were not meant to be taken seriously, and she was quickly discharged upon a finding that the client did not have any mental health issues and did not pose a danger to anyone. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan had the client evaluated by a reputable psychiatrist who provided his expert opinion that the client did not suffer from any mental health issues, and she did not pose any danger if allowed to possess a firearm. Upon presenting this proof, the police department activated her license to carry firearms.