2024
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 – Brockton District Court
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY CHARGES DISMISSED DESPITE VIDEO EVIDENCE SHOWING THE DEFENDANT SMASHING THE PROPERTY.
The client was a longtime employee of a paving company. After many years of service, his employer informed the Defendant that he would no longer be employed for the company. Upset at his termination, Defendant went out into the parking lot and smashed the front windshield of a company work-truck. Surveillance video captured the Defendant smashing the windshield. Defendant was charged with the felony offense of Malicious Destruction of Property over $1,200 pursuant to G.L. c. 266, §127. Defendant hired Attorney Gerald J. Noonan. This was a losing case because the Defendant was captured on video committing the crime. Although the employer was very upset by the property damage, Attorney Noonan was able to secure an agreement wherein the criminal charge would be dismissed upon the payment of restitution. In particular, the parties executed an Accord and Satisfaction Agreement where, in exchange for payment of the property damage, the criminal offense would be dismissed.
Commissioner of Probation
VARIOUS RECORD SEALING CASES.
Attorney Patrick J. Noonan also specializes in the expungement and sealing of criminal records. Throughout the past several months, Attorney Noonan has represented several clients and has successfully sealed all criminal charges from their records. The following are criminal charges that have been sealed from the records of several clients. For one client, Attorney Noonan was able to seal the charge of Shoplifting (G.L. c. 266, §30A). For another client, Attorney Noonan was able to seal all drug charges, including five-counts of Possession with Intent to Distribute (G.L. c. 94C, §32), the aggravated offense of Possession with Intent to Distribute as a subsequent offense, Drug Distribution in a School Zone (G.L. c. 94C, §32J), and five-counts of simple Possession of Class B Substance (G.L. c. 94C, §32A).
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Lawrence District Court
FELONY CONVICTION FOR CARRYING A DANGEROUS WEAPON VACATED. CASE DISMISSED.
In 1988, the Defendant, represented by court-appointed counsel, was convicted of Carrying a Dangerous Weapon (G.L. c. 269, §10(b)). The Defendant, now in his 60s, attempted to purchase a firearm in his home state of New Hampshire, but was denied after a federal background check showing this felony conviction. A felony conviction made him a federal prohibited person. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a motion for new trial arguing that the defendant’s guilty plea was not made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily, as he was under the impression that his case was dismissed upon the payment of a fine. He didn’t realize that his case resulted in a conviction until several decades later. Attorney Noonan also argued that this conviction was unlawful because it was not a crime for him to possess a “machete,” the dangerous weapon alleged. The court allowed the motion for a new trial. The Commonwealth decided not to prosecute. The case was dismissed.
Commonwealth v. A.P. – Massachusetts Court of Appeals
Commonwealth v. A.P.
Massachusetts Court of Appeals
Docket No. 2023-P-0581
ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL REVERSING CONVICTIONS FOR DRUG TRAFFICKING, POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE AND UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM
Police received information from a confidential informant that the defendant was distributing drugs from his apartment in Brockton. The confidential informant engaged in two controlled purchases of drugs from the defendant at his apartment in Brockton. The police obtained a search warrant to search the defendant’s apartment. Police executed the search warrant when the defendant was inside his apartment and they located 521 grams of cocaine, 45 grams of cocaine, 10 grams of heroin, 111 amphetamine pills, 64 oxycodone pills, anabolic steroids, human growth hormone, a loaded .22 caliber pistol, a hydraulic press, scales, and packaging material. The Defendant was convicted of five indictments, including drug trafficking, possession with intent to distribute, and unlawful possession of a firearm and he was sentenced to serve 3.5-5 years in state prison. Upon appeal, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that the search warrant was unconstitutional and failed to satisfy the particularity requirements because the warrant described the items to be seized as “all controlled substances under Chapter 94C. The Appeals Court agreed, and the Defendant’s convictions were reversed and he was released from custody.
Commonwealth v. A.P. – Mass. Appeals Court
Mass. Appeals Court
Docket No. 2023-P-0581
ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL REVERSING CONVICTIONS FOR DRUG TRAFFICKING, POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE AND UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM
Police received information from a confidential informant that the defendant was distributing drugs from his apartment in Brockton. The confidential informant engaged in two controlled purchases of drugs from the defendant at his apartment in Brockton. The police obtained a search warrant to search the defendant’s apartment. Police executed the search warrant when the defendant was inside his apartment and they located 521 grams of cocaine, 45 grams of cocaine, 10 grams of heroin, 111 amphetamine pills, 64 oxycodone pills, anabolic steroids, human growth hormone, a loaded .22 caliber pistol, a hydraulic press, scales, and packaging material. The Defendant was convicted of five indictments, including drug trafficking, possession with intent to distribute, and unlawful possession of a firearm and he was sentenced to serve 3.5-5 years in state prison. Upon appeal, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that the search warrant was unconstitutional and failed to satisfy the particularity requirements because the warrant described the items to be seized as “all controlled substances under Chapter 94C. The Appeals Court agreed, and the Defendant’s convictions were reversed and he was released from custody.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
MULTIPLE COUNTS OF VIOLATION OF AN ABUSE PREVENTION ORDER DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The client had a clerk-magistrate hearing on an application for criminal complaint alleging three counts of Violation of an Abuse Prevention Order (G.L. c. 209A, §7). At the clerk’s hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully argued that there was no probable cause to support any of the charges. The clerk found no probable cause and dismissed the criminal complaints with prejudice, meaning that these charges can never be filed against the client again.
Commonwealth v. Jane Doe – Wareham District Court
FELONY LARCENY CHARGE DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT. THE CLIENT WILL NOT HAVE ANY CRIMINAL RECORD.
The client was renting an apartment. When she moved out, she owed two months rent. According to the landlord, he contacted her to request payment, but she refused. The rent amount exceeded $1,200. The police filed an application for criminal complaint against the client for Larceny by Check (G.L. c. 266, §37), a felony offense. The criminal complaint was issued, and the client was scheduled to be arraigned in court. If she was arraigned, this felony offense would be on her criminal record. The client had no criminal record. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan negotiated with the District Attorney’s Office and the landlord, and the criminal complaint was dismissed prior to arraignment. She will have no record.
Commonwealth v. Jane Doe – Wareham District Court
FELONY LARCENY CHARGE DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT. THE CLIENT WILL NOT HAVE ANY CRIMINAL RECORD.
The client was renting an apartment. When she moved out, she owed two months rent. According to the landlord, he contacted her to request payment, but she refused. The rent amount exceeded $1,200. The police filed an application for criminal complaint against the client for Larceny by Check (G.L. c. 266, §37), a felony offense. The criminal complaint was issued, and the client was scheduled to be arraigned in court. If she was arraigned, this felony offense would be on her criminal record. The client had no criminal record. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan negotiated with the District Attorney’s Office and the landlord, and the criminal complaint was dismissed prior to arraignment. She will have no record.
Commonwealth v. John Doe – Taunton District Court
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT CHARGING CLIENT WITH CARRYING A FIREARM WITHOUT A LICENSE, CARRYING MINIMUM-MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCE, DISMISSED UPON PROOF THAT THE CLIENT DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME.
The client, a resident of Idaho, was traveling through Massachusetts when he was pulled over for a defective license plate. Police searched the trunk of the client’s car and located an unloaded handgun. The officer demanded that the client produce a valid firearms license, but the client told police that he did not have a firearm license. In preparing the case for trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan contacted the licensed firearm dealer who sold the client the firearm. The client was charged with Carrying a Firearm without a License (G.L. c. 269, §10A), which carries a minimum-mandatory jail sentence of 18 months. Attorney Noonan obtained a certified business record confirming that the client legally purchased the firearm in his home state of Idaho. The licensed dealer attested that the client’s purchase of the firearm complied with state and federal law. Attorney Noonan argued that the client complied with Massachusetts law when traveling through the Commonwealth with his firearm because he kept the firearm secured in his trunk and the firearm was unloaded. In advance of trial, Attorney Noonan presented the District Attorney’s Office with this evidence proving that his client did not commit a crime by transporting his firearm through Massachusetts. Upon review, the District Attorney’s Office agreed to dismiss the case after one year.