Commonwealth v. R.W. – Wrentham District Court

POSSESSION CLASS A SUBSTANCE: DISMISSED and SEALED
POSSESSION CLASS A SUBSTANCE: DISMISSED and SEALED

Client, 32 year-old financial consultant, with no criminal record was arrested and charged with Possession of Class A Heroin (two counts). Police were conducting surveillance in a high-crime area and observed a known drug dealer and a known drug user engage in a hand-to-hand transaction. Police then stopped Defendant’s motor vehicle and discovered heroin (Class A). Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion Requesting Assignment to a Drug Treatment Facility pursuant to Chapter 111E. The prosecutor objected. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence establishing Defendant’s drug dependency. Attorney Noonan presented a treatment plan to the court, which included the client’s enrollment in an outpatient program where he will be treated by a psychiatrist and a substance abuse counselor. The judge adopted Attorney Noonan’s treatment plan.

Result: Defendant’s case was dismissed upon his successful completion of drug treatment, and the drug charges were permanently sealed from the Defendant’s record.

Commonwealth v. M.K. – Dedham District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: NOT GUILTY

On July 8, 2013, Detective O’Connor of the Stoughton Police observed the Defendant’s vehicle traveling on Park Street / Route 27 in the town of Stoughton without any headlights on. Defendant committed a marked lanes violation and almost struck the police cruiser causing Detective O’Connor to swerve to the right in order to avoid a collision. Detective O’Connor pulled the Defendant over in a parking lot. When approached, Defendant looked at the Detective with a blank stare. She did not roll down her window. When she opened her door, the detective was “struck with an over powering odor of alcohol.” He observed that the Defendant’s eyes were bloodshot. Defendant’s speech was slurred. She could not locate her license or registration. Defendant admitted to consuming wine. Defendant had to use her vehicle and lean against the vehicle for balance. Defendant failed the one-legged stand and nine-step walk and turn. When arrested, Defendant gave a false last name. After a jury trial, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan obtained a not guilty verdict and the jury only deliberated for approximately 30 minutes. Attorney Noonan thoroughly discredited the arresting officer. In addition, Attorney Noonan showed that the Defendant’s poor performance on the field sobriety tests were due to the fact that she was wearing flip-flops, which impeded her performance. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the officer’s description of the Defendant’s vehicle, as contained in his police report, was totally wrong. Attorney Noonan presented testimony from witnesses showing that the Defendant consumed wine at her home, was not intoxicated, and left the home to pick up her niece at work in Stoughton when she was pulled over and arrested.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets a Not Guilty on OUI-Liquor charge.

M.W. vs. J.L. – Barnstable District Court

HARASSMENT ORDER: VACATED

In 2006, Plaintiff and his business partner formed several Florida entities for the purpose of buying, syndicating and managing a multi-million dollar commercial office building in Miami (referred to as “Property.”) In connection with buying the Property, Plaintiff issued a private (unregistered) securities offering a tenant-in-common (TIC) interests to 27 investors. 95% of the TIC owners are elderly and used their retirement monies to buy TIC interests in the Property based on the representations of Plaintiff made in the offering documents. Plaintiff’s offering promised the TIC investors fractional ownership in the Property as well as the right to receive distributions of the Property’s income. In 2007, Defendant paid $2 million to invest in the Property and became the largest of all TIC owners with an 18.67% TIC interest in the Property. Plaintiff controlled the Property’s bank accounts and handled all aspects of the Property’s financial management, including what was disclosed to the TIC’s. By the end of 2010, most of the TIC owners, including Defendant, became suspicious of Plaintiff’s management of the Property. On December 31, 2010, the TIC’s terminated Plaintiff. By March 2011, the Property was delinquent on its mortgage, owing more than $453,000 and the Property was on the verge of foreclosure. In April 2011, another company began managing the property.

The TIC’s and Defendant retained an Attorney to investigate the Plaintiff. The Law Firm demanded production of information and cooperation from Plaintiff. In response to the Law Firm’s demands, Plaintiff’s attorney claimed that Defendant and another TIC owner were “making threats” against Plaintiff. Through its investigation, the Law Firm discovered that Plaintiff stole from the Property’s bank accounts and rents and defrauded the TIC’s in several ways that were designed to conceal the nature of the payments.

On June 24, 2014, Plaintiff obtained a Harassment Order against the Defendant alleging that the Defendant had threatened him numerous times. Specifically, Defendant sent him a threatening letter via mail, sent him many threatening e-mails, threatened him with bodily harm on the telephone, and publically defamed and slandered him on the internet. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was hired to represent the Defendant and after a hearing the Harassment Order was vacated. Attorney Noonan established that Plaintiff’s harassment order was sought as part of an ulterior motive, such as retaliation against the Defendant, to deflect his own civil and criminal liability in the five ongoing lawsuits, to poison the ongoing civil suits against him, or to gain some sort of tactical advantage against Defendant in the civil lawsuits.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Harassment Order vacated against businessman.

Commonwealth v. M.R. – Taunton District Court

NEGLIGENT OPERATION: DISMISSED upon MOTION

Client was charged with Negligent Operation stemming from an incident on August 14, 2014 in which a State Trooper observed his Mustang and another vehicle (Toyota) traveling northbound on Route 495. While the two vehicles were traveling on this major highway, the passenger in the Mustang and the operator of the Toyota were attempting to pass an object (business card) between the two vehicles by traveling side-by-side and having the parties reach their hands out the window. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued a Motion to Dismiss arguing that his client was entitled to dismissal of the criminal complaint because he was denied the opportunity of having a hearing before the clerk-magistrate.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and the criminal complaint was dismissed upon court costs.

Commonwealth v. N.B. – Brockton District Court

OUI DRUGS: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE
CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE DRUG LAW: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE
FAILURE TO STOP FOR POLICE: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE

Client, 55 year-old, professional van driver, was arrested and charged with OUI (drugs) and other charges stemming from an incident on February 16, 2012. A State Trooper observed the Defendant’s vehicle speeding in Brockton and attempted to pull him over for Speeding. A total of three state police cruisers pursued the Defendant’s vehicle in an effort to effectuate a motor vehicle stop. Eventually, one police cruiser boxed Defendant’s vehicle in. The state trooper removed Defendant from the driver’s seat. The Trooper detected a strong odor of alcohol on the Defendant and observed that the Defendant had urinated in his pants. Defendant’s speech was slurred and his eyes were glassy and bloodshot. The Defendant admitted to consuming vodka or schnapps. Defendant stated that he ingested Xanax, Percocet, and Vicodin in combination with the vodka / schnapps. Police found syringes loaded with Heroin, burn spoons, glass pipes, and soaked cotton swabs in the vehicle. Defendant was administered and failed the HGN test, Hand Eye Coordination Test, Alphabet Test, One-Leg Stand, and Nine Step Walk and Turn. For 28 years, Defendant was employed as a professional van driver transporting elderly and disabled people. After his arrest, his employer laid him off and Defendant remained out of work during the pendency of his case. Defendant collected unemployment, went on assistance, and collected food stamps.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismissed all charges “with prejudice,” which means that the prosecution can never pursue the charges again, and the client is able to return to work.

Commonwealth v. E.N. – Brockton District Court

LARCENY OVER $250: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Defendant, an 18-year-old with no criminal record, was charged with Larceny over $250 (felony) stemming from allegations that he stole an iPhone valued at over $250. Defendant was a freshman at the University of Maine and a walk-on player on the football team. Defendant is an aspiring civil engineer.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismissed the criminal complaint prior to arraignment saving his client from having a felony charge on his record.

Commonwealth v. R.M. – Taunton District Court

ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME: DISMISSED

Police arrested three known drug dealers and obtained a search warrant to search the residence of the main drug dealer. Police discovered three cell phones in the residence, which were ringing non-stop and receiving text messages from potential drug buyers. Police answered the suspects’ phone and received requests to purchase drugs. Police arrested three individuals, including the Defendant, who made orders to purchase drugs on the telephone and arrived to the residence with money for the purchase. After Defendant’s arraignment, he retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan.

Result: At his first court appearance, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the Commonwealth to place his client on pretrial probation at the conclusion of which the criminal charge will be dismissed, and client avoids having to admit guilt.

Commonwealth v. N.S. – Wrentham District Court

LARCENY OVER $250: PRETRIAL PROBATION
TRESPASSING: NOT RESPONSIBLE

Client, 33 year-old warehouseman with no criminal record, was arrested and charged with Larceny over $250 (felony) and Trespassing stemming from an incident in which an identified caller reported that a person had stolen property from a National Grid. Police were dispatched to the scene and observed the Defendant tying the stolen materials to his roof-rack.

Result: On his first court appearance, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuades the Commonwealth to place his client on pretrial probation for six-months at the conclusion of which the charge will be dismissed and client avoids having to admit guilt. Client is found not responsible on the civil infraction of Trespassing.

Commonwealth v. K.T. – Brockton District Court

RECEIVE STOLEN PROPERTY: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
LARCENY BY CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
LARCENY BY CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
FORGERY OF CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
UTTERING FALSE CHECK: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Client, a 23 year-old woman with no criminal record, was alleged to have stolen several checks from her employer, a Real Estate Business. It was alleged that the Defendant then forged the stolen checks (making the checks payable to her and forging her employer’s signature). Defendant then cashed several of the forged checks at the bank and received payment from the bank. Defendant attempted to pass and cash another forged check, which the bank refused. The employer and the bank discovered the fraudulent transactions and contacted the police. Surveillance video from the bank showed the Defendant making these fraudulent transactions. In addition, the employer provided police with incriminating text messages sent to him from the defendant.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismisses 10 criminal charges (nine of which were felonies) prior to arraignment, saving his client from having 10 criminal charges on her record.

Commonwealth v. R.N. – Brockton District Court

ASSAULT with DEADLY WEAPON: DISMISSED at TRIAL

The alleged victim claimed that the Defendant pulled out a handgun, which he believed to be a Glock 9 mm. handgun, and threatened him with it in the aftermath of a heated domestic incident regarding child custody. In addition, the alleged victim claimed that the Defendant tried pulling him out his car and ripped the liner free from his driver’s side door. The alleged victim sped off in his car in fear and called 911. Today, the case was scheduled for trial.

Result: At the first trial date, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully obtained an outright dismissal of the criminal charge.