Result

JURY FINDS DEFENDANT NOT GUILTY OF OUI-LIQUOR (0.08% OR ABOVE) AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PRESENTS EXPERT EVIDENCE SHOWING DEFENDANT’S BLOOD ALCOHOL LEVEL WAS BELOW 0.08% AT THE TIME SHE OPERATED HER VEHICLE.

Norwell Police were dispatched to the scene of a single car crash. Upon arrival, police found the Defendant’s car, flipped over, more than 100 feet off the ground in a drainage ditch. Defendant admitted to being the operator. At trial, the officer testified that he detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from the Defendant and her eyes appeared to be red and bloodshot. The officer testified that it was his opinion that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol. The officer contacted an ambulance, as the Defendant appeared injured. The DA called the paramedic who testified that it was his opinion that the Defendant was intoxicated. The DA introduced hospital records showing that Defendant’s blood was tested for the presence of alcohol. The DA called an expert witness who testified that Defendant’s blood alcohol level was between 0.117% and 0.124%.

Result: At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan called an expert witness, Dr. Samson, who is a toxicologist, specializing in alcohol. Dr. Samson testified that Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was below 0.08% based on conversion factors she applied, which were generally accepted in the scientific community. In addition, Dr. Samson testified that the hospital’s blood test was not scientifically reliable and produced a higher alcohol level than what it actually was. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the charge of Operating under the Influence of Liquor with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or above, as the jury was not convinced that the Commonwealth proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant’s blood alcohol level was 0.08% or above.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES JUDGE TO TERMINATE HARASSMENT PREVENTION ORDER AGAINST DEFENDANT.

Plaintiff and Defendant, residents of Brockton, had an ongoing feud. Plaintiff was in a relationship with Defendant’s soon to be divorced husband. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant would come to her home, on numerous occasions, and pound on the door and would also follow her in her car. On one occasion, Plaintiff called police to report that Defendant confronted her in a parking lot and threatened her. Plaintiff obtained a Harassment Prevention Order (G.L. c. 258E) against the Defendant. A hearing was scheduled with regards to whether the restraining order would be extended for an additional period of time.

Result: After hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets the judge to terminate the restraining order.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS GUN CHARGE DISMISSED AGAINST MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL EMPLOYEE FOR LOSING HIS SHOTGUN ON A HUNTING TRIP.

Defendant went pheasant hunting in West Newbury. When getting ready to leave the hunting site, he placed his shotgun against a tree while he loaded his truck to leave. When he left the hunting location, he forgot that he left his shotgun leaning against a tree. A week later, somebody found the shotgun and turned it into the police. Defendant was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L).

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented a lot of evidence to the clerk-magistrate about his client’s background. He graduated from high school as the all-time leading scorer in basketball and led his soccer time to three State titles. He recently graduated from Regis College with honors boasting a 3.2 GPA. In college, he helped led his basketball team to a conference title. At present, he was employed at Massachusetts General Hospital in the Cardiology Department. Attorney Noonan argued that his client made an innocent mistake. His client acted responsibility by immediately reporting to police that his firearm was missing. He brought police to the location where he left the firearm and he searched the area exhaustively. He grew up in Vermont where he hunted with his father since he was young. Firearms were a big part of his life growing up and he loved hunting. Attorney Noonan convinced the clerk to dismiss the criminal complaint on the condition that his client complete a firearms safety course.

GUN CHARGE FOR LEAVING A LOADED LARGE CAPACITY FIREARM WITH A MINOR, WHICH CARRIES A MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCE, DISMISSED AGAINST SINGLE MOTHER FROM CAPE COD.

Defendant had a valid License to Carry Firearms. She was a resident of Yarmouth. She owned a .40 caliber Ruger handgun, which she kept in her home. Defendant was previously arrested for a domestic Assault & Battery. Because she was arrested for a crime, her License to Carry was suspended. Yarmouth Police went to her house to serve her with a suspension notice and to seize her firearm. Upon entry into the home, Defendant stated that she did not know where the firearm was located. Police searched the home and found the firearm, in a case, lying on the floor in the corner of the living room. The case was not locked and the firearm was not secured properly. Defendant had three young children in the home. Client was charged with the very serious offense of Improperly Storing a Loaded Large Capacity Firearm Near a Minor, a charge that carries a mandatory jail sentence. See G.L. c. 140, §121 and G.L. c. 140, §131L(b)-(e).

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan proved to the DA that the firearm was not a large capacity firearm because it was not capable of accepting more than 10 rounds of ammunition. In addition, Attorney Noonan persuaded the DA to reduce the charge to the misdemeanor offense of Improper Storage. The DA wanted the Defendant to attend a parenting course as a condition of her probation. Attorney Noonan persuaded the judge to remove that condition because the Defendant was a single mother and sole provider for her three children and the course would pose an undue hardship on her. In the end, Defendant admitted to sufficient facts on the lesser misdemeanor charge and was placed on administrative probation for one year with no conditions. If the Defendant stays out of trouble, the charge will be dismissed after one year.

OUI CONVICTION SEALED FROM INTERIOR DESIGNER’S RECORD

Client, an owner of an interior designer company, was convicted of Operating under the Influence of Liquor in Boston. She had no other criminal record. She contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan with the hopes of getting her one conviction sealed from her record, as this was something that always bothered her.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to get the client’s conviction for Operating under the Influence of Liquor sealed from her record.

SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGE AGAINST FATHER DISMISSED AFTER ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN PROVES THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE THAT HIS CLIENT COMMITTED AN “INDECENT” TOUCHING OF HIS DAUGHTER.

Client’s daughter went into the police department to report that her father came into her bedroom and inappropriately touched her, as she was lying in her bed. She alleged that the Defendant grabbed her thigh and spanked her butt on the butt-cheek. Defendant was charged with the very serious offense of Indecent Assault and Battery on a person over 14 (G.L. c. 265, §13H), which is a felony carrying jail time and possible sex offender registration.

Result: At a hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan introduced evidence that the daughter was upset with her father because he confronted her about smoking too much marijuana, not getting a job, and lying around the house all day. Client had loaned her money to pay her bills and she promised to pay him back with her tax refund. However, instead of paying her father back, she used her entire tax refund to buy marijuana. On the date of the incident, she smoked marijuana and was also taking prescription medication. Defendant went into her bedroom to wake her up and to ask her to clean up the mess she made in the living room, to do the dishes, and take the dog out. She refused to get out of bed, so the Defendant tapped her on the hip. On cross-examination by Attorney Noonan, she admitted that she was not sure whether he touched her on the butt and he could have touched her on the hip. Attorney Noonan introduced a text message sent by the daughter the next day in which she made inconsistent statements about the incident. Attorney Noonan also introduced evidence, through another witness, attacking the daughter’s credibility. Attorney Noonan was successful in arguing that the touching was not criminal. Specifically, the touching was not “harmful,” “offensive,” or “indecent.” After considering all the evidence, the Court ruled that there was insufficient probable cause to support the complaint for an Indecent Assault & Battery.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES DA TO DISMISS 3 FELONY VANDALISM CHARGES AGAINST COLLEGE STUDENT PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT, SAVING HIS CLIENT FROM HAVING A CRIMINAL RECORD.

Sharon Police had been receiving reports of ongoing vandalism on the same building in town. Specifically, this building had been repeatedly tagged with spray-paint and graffiti. An officer, investigating the vandalism, observed fresh vandalism, which he believed to have been inflicted by our client. Specifically, the officer observed fresh spray-paint with the client’s last name in writing. Another officer in the department was familiar with the last name as being the Defendant’s last name. Defendant later admitted that he was the person who committed the fresh vandalism. Sharon Police charged Defendant with Vandalism of Property also known as Defacement of Real or Personal Property (G.L. c. 266, §126A). If should be noted that a conviction for this offense results in a one-year suspension of a driver’s license.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan worked tirelessly to obtain as much favorable evidence as possible to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the charges prior to his client’s arraignment. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the building was totally covered in graffiti and his client only spray-painted two very small areas. His client cleaned and removed his graffiti. Attorney presented evidence showing his client was an exceptional academic student in college, majoring in Biology, with plans of attending graduate school to get a Master’s Degree in Genetics. Attorney Noonan convinced the DA to dismiss the three felony vandalism charges prior to arraignment, saving his client from having any charges on his record and thus ensuring his future in pursuing a career in Genetics.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS DOMESTIC ASSAULT CHARGES DISMISSED AGAINST HARD-WORKING IMMIGRANT WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD.

Raynham Police responded to a 911 call from a female victim who reported that her boyfriend just assaulted her. She ran out of the house and was calling police from a field down the street. She told police that slapped her in the face. She told police this was the third time he had assaulted her. Police observed redness to the victim’s face. Defendant was charged with domestic Assault & Battery on a family or household member (G.L. c. 265, §13M).

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan brought the case to trial. He argued to the DA that the victim’s 911 call was inadmissible. The victim invoked her marital privilege to not testify against her husband, the Defendant. Without the victim’s testimony, the only way the Commonwealth could prove the case was through the victim’s 911 call, which was inadmissible under the rules of evidence. The Commonwealth could not try the case and they were forced to dismiss the charges.

AT TRIAL, ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS 5 ASSAULT CHARGES, INCLUDING 3 FELONY CHARGES FOR ASSAULT WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON, DISMISSED AGAINST HAITIAN IMMIGRANT FACING POTENTIAL DEPORTATION.

Brockton Police were dispatched to a gas station for a reported fight in progress. Upon arrival, police observed the Defendant being held on the ground by two males. An investigation showed that the Defendant had a dispute with gas station employees over payment of gas. The employees were claiming that the Defendant was trying to steal gas without paying. The employees claimed that the Defendant retrieved a tire jack from his vehicle and began swinging it wildly trying to injure the employees. Defendant was charged with 3 counts of Assault with a Dangerous Weapon (G.L. c. 165, §15B) for attempting to strike three employees with the tire jack. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery for allegedly pushing a female employee and another count of Assault & Battery (G.L. c. 265, §13A) for hitting a male employee.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan brought the case to trial. With a court order, Attorney Noonan obtained a video that one employee took on her cell phone of an argument taking place inside the gas station office. Attorney Noonan learned that another employee took a video on his cell phone of the entire incident that occurred outside. Attorney Noonan sought a court order for the employee to produce this video, which he never did. Attorney Noonan was prepared to argue that the employee took a video of the entire incident but deliberately choose not to produce it under court order. Attorney Noonan subpoenaed this person but he failed to appear at trial. Attorney Noonan notified the Commonwealth that he would be arguing self-defense at trial. Attorney Noonan claimed that the Defendant acted in self-defense when he grabbed the tire jack because the two male employees attacked him. Defendant did not hit anyone with the tire jack; he only swung it to get his attackers to back away. Attorney Noonan sought to introduce evidence that one of the male employees, who attacked the Defendant, had prior convictions for violent offenses, which supported his case that the male employee was the aggressor. Defendant was prepared to take the stand in his own defense and testify that the male employees were aggressive, had attacked him, and preventing him from leaving the gas station. One employee even made a racial slur against the Defendant who was black. Attorney Noonan obtained evidence that his client did not attempt to steal any gas. Rather, his client had sufficient funds on his debit card, which for some reason did not process on the gas station’s machine. After two trial dates, the alleged victims (gas station employees) failed to appear and the case was dismissed. Defendant was in the process of becoming a U.S. citizen and, if convicted for these serious criminal offenses, he was facing deportation.

GRAFFITI AND TRESPASSING CHARGES DISMISSED AGAINST COLLEGE STUDENT WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD.

Foxboro Police were dispatched to a building in town for reports of vandalism to the property. Police spoke to the owner of the property who reported that the property had been broken into. The owner pointed out all new fresh graffiti spray-painted on the building. Police found a posting on social media from the Defendant’s account showing tagging’s he made to the property. Another photo showed the Defendant’s vehicle parking on the property. Defendant admitted to police that he had vandalized the property. Foxboro Police charged Defendant with Vandalism of Property also known as Defacement of Real or Personal Property (G.L. c. 266, §126A). He was also charged with Criminal Trespassing (G.L. c. 266, §120).

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan pointed out that his client only made three very small tagging’s that were less than 6 inches in size. Attorney Noonan also presented evidence showing that many youths have vandalized this property repeatedly over a lengthy period of time whereas his client only did it once and made very small tagging’s. Attorney Noonan presented evidence showing that there were no signs posted on the property for no trespassing and the property looked abandoned.