Case Results
Commonwealth v. L.A. – Brockton District Court
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.
Commonwealth v. J.N. – Hingham District Court
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.
Commonwealth v. A Juvenile – Brockton Juvenile Court
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.
Commonwealth v. A.M. – Brockton District Court
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.
Commonwealth v. C.S. – Brockton District Court
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.
Taunton Man’s Application to Renew His License to Carry Firearms Was Denied Due to a Prior Conviction for a Firearm’s Offense but Attorney Patrick J. Noonan Gets the Police Department to Renew Client’s LTC.
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.
Commonwealth v. D.R. – Middlesex Superior Court
DA’S OFFICE ARGUES THAT DEFENDANT IS TOO DANGEROUS TO RELEASE FROM JAIL BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS HIS CLIENT’S RELEASE.
A Grand Jury returned 7 indictments against the Defendant for: Kidnapping, Assault & Battery on an Elderly Person, Assault & Battery with Dangerous Weapon on an Elderly Person (two counts), Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon Causing Serious Bodily Injury, and Assault & Battery on an Elderly Person Causing Serious Bodily Injury.
Defendant resided in the same home with his 83 year-old mother, the alleged victim. Police received a call from the alleged victim’s other son who was concerned that the Defendant may have the mother tied to a chair. A police officer was dispatched to the home. The officer looked into the window and saw the alleged victim lying on a couch waving her arms in the air. The officer went to the side door. Defendant opened the door and allowed the officer inside. The officer observed dried blood on the Defendant’s shirt. The officer heard the alleged victim yelling for help from the living room. As the officer made his way to the living room, he observed dried blood droplets on the floor. The alleged victim told the officer that the Defendant had assaulted her the day before. Specifically, she alleged that the Defendant threw her walker at her leg causing a laceration to her leg. She claimed that the blood droplets on the floor were from her leg injury. Photographs were taken of the leg laceration. She was taken to the hospital.
From that point on, the alleged victim would go on to make a series of false allegations against the Defendant. She alleged that the Defendant held her against her will. She alleged that he took the phone away to prevent her from calling for help. She alleged that the Defendant physically abused her, on multiple occasions, to the point where she needed to go to the hospital. She alleged that the Defendant would not feed her. She alleged that the Defendant would make awful statements to her. She alleged that the Defendant stole money from her. She believed the Defendant would kill her. The Defendant denies all these false allegations.
On January 5, 2017, the DA’s Office requested that the Court hold the Defendant in custody (in jail) for 90 days or until his trial because he was too dangerous to release. As the Defendant was in jail awaiting his Dangerousness Hearing, he retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan. Attorney Noonan dropped everything he was doing and came to his client’s aid.
Result: After a two-day hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in getting his client released from jail. If the Judge sided with the DA, the client would have been held in jail for 90 days or until his trial.
Commonwealth v. Craig Barton – Brockton Superior Court
Indictments: 2013 -303
DEFENDANT WAS FACING LIFE IN PRISON BUT DUE TO THE RELENTLESS EFFORTS OF THE NOONAN DEFENSE TEAM ALL CHARGES WERE DROPPED ON THE DAY OF TRIAL.
In 2013, a Grand Jury returned the following 11 indictments against the Defendant: 2 indictments for Rape of Child by Force, an offense which carries a sentence in state prison for life or for any term of years; 2 indictments for Assault with Intent to Rape a Child, an offense which carries a sentence in state prison for life or for any term of years; 2 indictments for Incest, an offense which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years; and 5 indictments for Indecent Assault and Battery on a Child, an offense which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years.
The case was very involved, highly complex, thoroughly investigated, and strongly prosecuted. The Commonwealth was very intent on prosecuting the case to the fullest extent of the law. The Noonan Defense Team was even more intent on proving their client’s innocence. On January 3, 2017, the Noonan Defense Team came to trial ready to attack. On the day of trial, the Commonwealth filed a Nolle Prosequi on all charges “in the interest of justice.” A Nolle Prosequi is the formal determination of the District Attorney that he will no longer prosecute the case.
Result: Our client was charged with very serious offenses carrying the possibility of LIFE IN PRISON but due to relentless efforts of the Noonan Defense Team the District Attorney’s Office, on the day of trial, decided that they will no longer prosecute the case.
“Easton man arraigned on sexual assault indictment charges.”
Commonwealth v. A.C. – Brockton District Court
NO CRIMINAL COMPLAINT ISSUED AGAINST COLLEGE FRESHMAN FOR BEING A MINOR IN POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL AND NO CRIMINAL CHARGE ENTERED ON HER RECORD
Client, an 18 year-old freshman student at Bridgewater State University, was caught carrying a duffel bag containing alcohol into a dormitory. Prior to her Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan had his client take the proactive approach of completing a brief alcohol education and intervention program. At the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Noonan presented the Clerk with a Certificate of Completion from the brief alcohol program. In addition, Attorney Noonan presented evidence with regards to his client’s background, which included being an honor student at Boston Latin, a 4-year varsity athlete, and a volunteer worker teaching Catholic education to young children.
Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuades the Clerk-Magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint of being a minor in possession of alcohol. Attorney Noonan saves his young client from having a criminal record and avoids any school disciplinary proceedings.