Case Results
Commonwealth v. J.S. – Massachusetts Court of Appeals
Commonwealth v. J.S.
Massachusetts Court of Appeals
104 Mass. App. Ct. 1110 (2024)
AFTER THE DEFENDANT PLED GUILTY TO DRUNK DRIVING AND WAS CONVICTED, ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL ON GROUNDS OF EGREGIOUS GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT. THE DEFENDANT’S CONVICTION IS VACATED. WE ARE NOW MOVING FOR TRIAL.
The defendant, represented by another attorney, admitted to sufficient facts and tendered a plea on an offense charging him with Operating under the Influence of Liquor. Defendant took a breath test showing that his blood-alcohol-content was three times over the legal limit. Because there was no chance of winning at trial with such a high breathalyzer result, Defendant pled out to the OUI charge. The plea resulted in the client’s termination from a government position. The client hired Attorney Patrick J. Noonan and Attorney Scott Martin to vacate his conviction. We filed a motion to withdraw his plea based on the recent litigation surrounding the government’s misconduct in withholding exculpatory breath test records, as well as a recent decision finding that breath test results, generated within a particular timeframe, were inadmissible due to issues of scientific reliability and the government’s misconduct in handling breath test records. The judge denied our motion, finding that there was no evidence of egregious government misconduct. The judge also found that – even if the breath test result was excluded from evidence – the Defendant would not have gone to trial because the evidence of his intoxication was overwhelming. We won on appeal. The Appeals Court found that there was a conclusive presumption that the Commonwealth engaged in government misconduct at the time of the Defendant’s breath test. Further, the Appeals Court found that we established a reasonable probability that the Defendant would have gone to trial had he known that the breath test evidence would not have been introduced against him. On appeal, the Commonwealth argued that there was no reasonable probability that the Defendant would have insisted on a trial because the police report contained overwhelming evidence that the client was intoxicated. We argued that a person’s decision to insist on a trial is a unique, individualized decision. Here, the Defendant would have insisted on a trial because an acquittal would allow him to keep his government job. Most attorneys would not try an OUI case if a police report contains strong evidence of intoxication. However, Attorney Noonan and Attorney Martin are not your typical attorneys because we try difficult cases all the time and win acquittals despite there being strong evidence of our client’s guilt. The client’s plea and conviction were vacated. The case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings. At this point, we are intending to try the case in hopes of an acquittal.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Taunton District Court
DRIVING OFFENSES AGAINST HAITIAN IMMIGRANT DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
Our client recently emigrated to the U.S. from Haiti. He has been employed as a warehouse worker. The client was driving a friend’s vehicle and was pulled over because the car had no inspection sticker and the windshield was heavily cracked. Upon the stop, the client only had a learner’s permit with no authorized driver in the vehicle. As a result, the client was charged with Operating without a License, No Inspection, and a violation of the Code of Massachusetts Regulation for the defective windshield. The client did not have much money, so we took the case at a discounted rate and persuaded the clerk to drop all charges.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Attleboro District Court
ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS CRIMINAL CHARGES DISMISSED AGAINST CHINESE IMMIGRANT WHO THREATENED TO SHOOT CO-WORKERS.
Defendant is an elderly hard-working Chinese immigrant. Defendant was in the manufacturing department of a company. Co-workers noticed that the Defendant was acting bizarre and unusually. His employer spoke with the Defendant about his poor work performance. Defendant believed that his co-workers went behind his back and complained to their boss about his work performance. Defendant was very agitated when confronted about his work performance. Co-workers called the police because the Defendant threatened to leave and come back with a firearm and shoot his co-workers. Police responded to the scene. Police approached the Defendant as he was working in the manufacturing department. Out of an abundance of caution and for the safety of everyone, police attempted to escort the Defendant from the workplace, causing him to become more agitated and the Defendant repeated his threats to shoot everyone. Defendant was charged with multiple counts of Threats to Commit a Crime pursuant to G.L. c. 275, §2. Defendant had never been in any trouble. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan represented the client and gathered information, which he presented to the prosecution about the state of his client’s health. Defendant was elderly and was being treated for the late stages of cancer and was prescribed numerous strong medications. Attorney Noonan presented medical evidence and argued that the Defendant was not in the right state of mind due to his aggressive cancer treatment combined with the stress and strong medications. His behavior was completely out of the norm and he had no intention to harm anyone. Although witnesses stated that the Defendant threatened to leave the workplace, retrieve his firearm, and return, Defendant did not even possess a gun. After considering the evidence presented by Attorney Noonan, the prosecution agreed to dismiss all charges.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGE AGAINST ARMED SECURITY GUARD DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
Police responded to the scene of a domestic disturbance. Upon arrival, the client’s ex-girlfriend reported that the Defendant showed up to her apartment, unannounced, banging on the door and he forced himself inside the apartment. Defendant accused her of having an affair with another man. The other man was present in the apartment. An argument ensued between the Defendant and his ex-girlfriend’s lover, who claimed that the Defendant punched him in the face. Police observed visible injuries to his face. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13A. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan represented him at a clerk-magistrate hearing. Because of the criminal charge, Defendant was terminated from his job as an armed security guard and his license to carry firearms was suspended. Defendant required an LTC in order to work in armed security. Defendant had been an armed security guard for the past five years and the Defendant had no prior criminal record. Attorney Noonan convinced the clerk to hold the case open for 3 months. If the Defendant remains out of trouble and does not get arrested, the charge would be withdrawn, and the criminal offense will not show up on his record. Attorney Noonan is also retained for the purposes of restoring the Defendant’s LTC so he can return to work.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGE AGAINST ARMED SECURITY GUARD DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.
Police responded to the scene of a domestic disturbance. Upon arrival, the client’s ex-girlfriend reported that the Defendant showed up to her apartment, unannounced, banging on the door and he forced himself inside the apartment. Defendant accused her of having an affair with another man. The other man was present in the apartment. An argument ensued between the Defendant and his ex-girlfriend’s lover, who claimed that the Defendant punched him in the face. Police observed visible injuries to his face. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13A. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan represented him at a clerk-magistrate hearing. Because of the criminal charge, Defendant was terminated from his job as an armed security guard and his license to carry firearms was suspended. Defendant required an LTC in order to work in armed security. Defendant had been an armed security guard for the past five years and the Defendant had no prior criminal record. Attorney Noonan convinced the clerk to hold the case open for 3 months. If the Defendant remains out of trouble and does not get arrested, the charge would be withdrawn, and the criminal offense will not show up on his record. Attorney Noonan is also retained for the purposes of restoring the Defendant’s LTC so he can return to work.
Commonwealth v. B.D., and others – Massachusetts Appeals Court
Commonwealth v. B.D., and others
Massachusetts Appeals Court
104 Mass. App. Ct. 161 (2024)
IN A HIGH-PROFILE CASE, ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL AFFIRMING THE DISMISSAL OF SEX-TRAFFICKING CHARGES AGAINST FIVE DEFENDANTS.
Five Defendants were charged with Trafficking a Person for Sexual Servitude pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §50(a), which carries a minimum-mandatory prison sentence of 5 years. The police placed an advertisement online posing as prostitutes. The advertisement listed the sexual services offered by the fictitious prostitute and contained a phone number for the prostitute. Defendants contacted the phone number, believing that they were communicating with a prostitute. In reality, Defendants were speaking to an undercover officer, posing as the prostitute. Defendants exchanged text messages with the undercover officer where they discussed the payment of money in exchange for sexual services. The undercover officer instructed the Defendants to meet at a hotel for the exchange. When each Defendant arrived at the hotel, they were arrested. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in convincing the Superior Court to dismiss the sex-trafficking charges for lack of probable cause and the Commonwealth appealed the dismissal to the Massachusetts Court of Appeals. Attorney Noonan argued the case for the Defendants on appeal. The Appeals Court agreed with Attorney Noonan that the Defendants conduct did not constitute sex-trafficking and the order dismissing the sex-trafficking charges was affirmed. This case was published in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for its significance.
Commonwealth v. B.D., and others – Massachusetts Appeals Court
Commonwealth v. B.D., and others
Massachusetts Appeals Court
104 Mass. App. Ct. 161 (2024)
IN A HIGH-PROFILE CASE, ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL AFFIRMING THE DISMISSAL OF SEX-TRAFFICKING CHARGES AGAINST FIVE DEFENDANTS.
Five Defendants were charged with Trafficking a Person for Sexual Servitude pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §50(a), which carries a minimum-mandatory prison sentence of 5 years. The police placed an advertisement online posing as prostitutes. The advertisement listed the sexual services offered by the fictitious prostitute and contained a phone number for the prostitute. Defendants contacted the phone number, believing that they were communicating with a prostitute. In reality, Defendants were speaking to an undercover officer, posing as the prostitute. Defendants exchanged text messages with the undercover officer where they discussed the payment of money in exchange for sexual services. The undercover officer instructed the Defendants to meet at a hotel for the exchange. When each Defendant arrived at the hotel, they were arrested. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in convincing the Superior Court to dismiss the sex-trafficking charges for lack of probable cause and the Commonwealth appealed the dismissal to the Massachusetts Court of Appeals. Attorney Noonan argued the case for the Defendants on appeal. The Appeals Court agreed with Attorney Noonan that the Defendants conduct did not constitute sex-trafficking and the order dismissing the sex-trafficking charges was affirmed. This case was published in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for its significance.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Brockton District Court
ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGE DISMISSED AT TRIAL.
Defendant has no prior criminal record. Defendant resides with his father and brother. His brother, the alleged victim, called 911 and reported that the Defendant attacked him and ripped out his hair. On scene, police observed serious injuries to the victim, including a deep laceration to his eyebrow, which required stitches. Police observed long locks of the victim’s hair on the floor, which the Defendant ripped out. Police photographed the victim’s injuries. At the scene, Defendant’s father reported that he had to break up the fight. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery on a Family / Household Member pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13M. On the day of trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to get the charge dismissed.