Commonwealth v. T.W. – Plymouth District Court

ASSAULT & BATTERY: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Client, 35-year government contractor and father of four children, charged with Assault & Battery and Malicious Destruction of Property stemming from an altercation in which the Defendant allegedly punched another man with a closed fist during an argument and damaged the windshield of the victim’s vehicle. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in getting the charges dismissed prior to arraignment to preserve the client’s criminal record.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets all criminal charges dismissed prior to arraignment saving his client from having any charges entered on his record saving client’s job, as his occupation requires government clearance.

Commonwealth v. T.S. – New Bedford Juvenile Court

MALICIOUS BURNING OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED

Client, a juvenile, was charged with Malicious Burning of Personal Property (felony) stemming from a fire that was set to a tree house with accelerant propane tanks. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully obtained an agreement with the prosecution for a disposition called pretrial probation. Pretrial probation is a very difficult disposition to attain because it is available only in limited circumstances and must be agreed to by the prosecution. At the conclusion of a non-supervisory probationary period, the criminal charge will be dismissed. Pretrial probation is much better than a continuance without a finding (CWOF) because the Defendant (or in this case, the juvenile) does have to admit to sufficient evidence for a finding of guilty. Therefore, it cannot be held against the Defendant as a prior offense if he is ever charged with a crime in the future. Here, the juvenile was placed on a probationary sentence during which time he attended a fire intervention course and performed community service. The criminal charge was then dismissed after the juvenile performed his community service and when the probationary period ended.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets Malicious Burning of Property charge dismissed outright against juvenile client.

Commonwealth v. C.F. – Quincy District Court

ASSAULT & BATTERY DANGEROUS WEAPON: DISMISSED
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED

Client, 20-year-old office worker, was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and malicious destruction of property stemming from an incident in which she threatened the victim with an aluminum baseball bat and damaged the victim’s 2010 Mercedes with said aluminum baseball bat. Defendant chased the victim into his vehicle with the aluminum baseball bat. Once the victim got inside his vehicle, Defendant proceeded to smash his vehicle repeatedly with the baseball bat until the victim sped away. The 2010 Mercedes sustained property damage in excess of $9,000.00. At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully argued that the Defendant was acting in self-defense. Specifically, Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the alleged victim was stalking and constantly harassing the Defendant through a chain of disturbing text messages and e-mails. The Clerk-Magistrate found that the alleged victim acted justifiably, as she was placed in imminent fear of bodily harm.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets felony charges dismissed against 20 year-old Defendant.

Commonwealth v. C.B. – Brockton District Court

BREAKING & ENTERING: DISMISSED
LARCENY over $250: DISMISSED

Defendant was alleged to have broken into his girlfriend’s apartment and stolen a mirror, Northface jacket, and $480 in cash. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaints dismissed and remanded for a clerk-magistrate’s hearing. Originally, Brockton Police sought a show cause hearing and the criminal complaint issued because the Defendant failed to appear. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the Defendant never received notice of the show cause hearing because the summons was returned, as it was sent to an insufficient address. Because the Defendant failed to appear at the show cause hearing, Cambridge Police arrested him at his business. The Cambridge Police, however, mistakenly brought the Defendant to the Cambridge District Court for an arraignment when they were supposed to bring him to the Brockton District Court. As a result, Defendant was held in the House of Correction for three days until he was transported to the Brockton District Court (the correct court) for his arraignment. Patrick J. Noonan (then a third-year law student) filed a Memorandum of Law for the clerk-magistrate to consider in determining whether to issue the criminal complaints. With regards to the Breaking & Entering, Patrick J. Noonan argued in the Memo that the Defendant did not break into the “dwelling place of another” because he had a right to habitation and occupancy in the apartment. See Commonwealth v. Robbins, 422 Mass. 305 (1996). Specifically, Defendant paid rent, had a key to the apartment, and lived in the apartment for four-months prior to the incident. With regards to the Larceny, Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the mirror belonged to the Defendant, not the alleged victim. Specifically, Attorney Noonan presented photographs of the mirror that pre-dated the alleged incident in the custody of the Defendant. With regards to the Northface jacket, Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the Defendant purchased the Northface jacket on his credit card and provided a copy of his bank statement to the clerk-magistrate. Lastly, Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant was a jilted lover and upset at the Defendant for breaking up with her and getting back together with his wife. Attorney Noonan presented Facebook messages (post-dating the incident) sent to the Defendant’s wife from the alleged victim where she blasts the Defendant for breaking up with her but she mentions nothing about the alleged breaking and entering and larcenies.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinces clerk-magistrate not to issue criminal complaints on felony charges against his client.

Commonwealth v. K.A. – Taunton District Court

MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED
TAGGING PROPERTY: DISMISSED

Defendant, a high school student with no prior criminal record, was charged with Malicious Destruction of Property and Tagging Property in connection with a string of incidents reported to Easton Police that many properties had been broken into, trespassed, and marked with graffiti and spray paint. Police interviewed the defendant who confessed to tagging all the properties. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence to the District Attorney’s Office that his client was a young man with no criminal record. He was outstanding student in high school and had been applying to colleges. Attorney Noonan presented the prosecutor with letters from his client’s teachers showing that he was a good student and a good kid. Attorney Noonan had his client pay restitution to the property owner for the damage caused to his property.

Result: After extensive negotiations with the District Attorney’s Office, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets all property damage crimes dismissed against his high school client with no criminal record.

Commonwealth v. S.M. – Hingham District Court

LEAVING THE SCENE PROPERTY DAMAGE: DISMISSED
OPERATING RECKLESSLY: DISMISSED

Police received two calls reporting that they heard loud skidding followed by a loud crash. Upon arrival, police observed fresh skid marks and damage to a stone wall in front of someone’s property. The vehicle drove off striking a second stone wall. Boulders from the stone wall were scattered all over the homeowner’s front lawn. Police found a license plate at the scene, which was registered to the Defendant. Police went to the Defendant’s residence and observed fresh heavy damage to his vehicle with the license plate missing. Defendant admitted to police that he had been driving in the area and he must have lost control of his vehicle but he denied hitting any stone wall.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuades clerk-magistrate not to issue criminal complaints against recent college graduate.

Commonwealth v. R.L. – Taunton District Court

MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION of PROPERTY: DISMISSED
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION of PROPERTY: DISMISSED
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION of PROPERTY: DISMISSED

Defendant was alleged to have caused damage to the alleged victim’s motor vehicle on three separate occasions. On one occasion, Defendant was alleged to have lit the cover of the Defendant’s motor vehicle on fire. On the second occasion, Defendant was alleged to have dumped a pan of fried linguisa and onions on the motor vehicle. On the third occasion, the Defendant was alleged to have burned holes on the roof of the convertible. The total amount of all the damage was estimated to be in excess of $5,000. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss, which was allowed on October 10, 2006.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and three felonies charges are dismissed.

Commonwealth v. J.G. – Brockton District Court

BREAKING & ENTERING FOR FELONY: DISMISSED
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED

Brockton Police were dispatched for a breaking and entering in progress. The caller reported that the suspect was throwing rocks at the windows and trying to break down the door. The caller gave a description and identified the suspect as being the Defendant who fled the scene and was later apprehended by police. Officers observed extensive damage to the home. The windows to the home were broken, the exterior door was broken, and the interior door was broken. Witnesses stated that the Defendant was attempting to break into the home to see whether his wife was having an affair with another man.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets felony charges dismissed.

Crimes Against Property