Violent Crimes
Commonwealth v. Two Defendants
Quincy District Court
ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN WINS DISMISSAL OF ASSAULT & BATTERY CHARGES AGAINST FATHER AND SON ARISING OUT OF A GROUP FIGHT ON A PARTY BUS.
Defendants, father and son, were on a party bus. They were celebrating the birthday of their mother / wife by treating her to an evening on a bus, which visits local restaurants and drinking establishments. There were other people on the party bus. The other group members were very intoxicated; they were loud, and disruptive. The son asked the group to refrain from using profanities and vulgarities because they were trying to have a nice evening with the family. The other group members were shouting at the driver to turn up the music. An argument, which turned physical, ensued between the two groups. During this altercation, members of the other group alleged that both defendants were aggressive, and started a fight, and threw punches. A female member of the other group was punched in the face and she sustained a bloody nose. Defendants denied starting the fight and denied punching the female. Both defendants were charged with Assault & Battery (G.L. c. 265, §13A). Attorney Gerald J. Noonan represented both clients at a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, but despite his zealous advocacy the clerk found that there was sufficient evidence to charge them. The clerk found that the issues raised by Attorney Noonan were trial issues. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan prepared the case for trial. On the day of trial, all charges were dismissed against the Defendants.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
Stoughton District Court
ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN VACATES A CONVICTION FOR DOMESTIC ASSAULT & BATTERY FROM 1963 AGAINST 83 YEAR-OLD KINGSTON MAN.
Defendant was convicted in 1963 after having pled guilty to committing an Assault & Battery on his then-wife. Defendant, now 83 years-old, applied for a License to Carry Firearms but was automatically disqualified due to the domestic violence conviction. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan moved the court to vacate the conviction in the interests of justice, and the Court agreed. Now that the conviction is vacated, the client is eligible to apply for a License to Carry Firearms.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
Taunton District Court
FIREFIGHTER PLEADS GUILTY TO ASSAULT & BATTERY, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NEW TRIAL AFTER PROVING THAT THE DEFENDANT’S PLEA WAS NOT MADE INTELLIGENTLY AND VOLUNTARILY.
In 2018, Defendant pled guilty to two-counts of Assault & Battery on a Family / Household Member pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13M. As a result of his guilty plea, the Defendant lost his job as a firefighter. Defendant hired Attorney Patrick J. Noonan for the purpose of withdrawing his plea, vacating his conviction, and awarding him a trial. Attorney Noonan interviewed the Defendant regarding his decision to plead guilty, and obtained a transcript of the plea hearing. Whenever a Defendant enters a plea of guilty, the judge is required to follow certain rules to ensure that the Defendant’s plea is made intelligently and voluntarily. After thoroughly reviewing the transcript of the plea hearing, Attorney Noonan believed that the judge did not follow the proper procedure in conducting the plea. The prosecution argued that the plea hearing was properly conducted. After a hearing, the court agreed with Attorney Noonan that the plea hearing was not conducted properly, and the court vacated the convictions. The Defendant is now entitled to a trial.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
Plymouth Superior Court
CLIENT WAS CONVICTED AFTER A JURY TRIAL OF RAPE AND INDECENT ASSAULT & BATTERY, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NEW TRIAL BASED ON NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE.
Attorney Patrick J. Noonan represented the Defendant at a trial in the Plymouth Superior Court on indictments charging him with Rape of Child and Indecent Assault & Battery. The jury found the Defendant guilty on all charges. One-week after the guilty verdict, Attorney Noonan came into possession of newly discovered evidence and immediately filed a Motion for New Trial. Attorney Noonan argued that the newly discovered evidence casts serious doubt on the justice of the conviction and this newly discovered evidence would have played a real factor in the jury’s deliberations. After a hearing, the trial judge agreed with Attorney Noonan and granted the Defendant a new trial. Attorney Noonan was able to secure his client’s release pending his new trial.
Commonwealth v. C.M.
Mass. Appeals Court
Docket No.: 102 Mass. App. Ct. 1106 (2023)
Commonwealth v. C.M.
APPEALS COURT AGREES WITH ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN THAT A NEW HEARING IS REQUIRED TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE DEFENDANT’S PRIOR ATTORNEY WAS INEFFECTIVE.
Defendant, represented by prior counsel, was charged with two-counts of Assault & Battery stemming from two separate incidents in which his ex-wife accused of him physically assaulting her. The case was scheduled for trial. On the advice of his prior attorney, Defendant pled guilty and was sentenced to two years of probation with the condition to complete the batterer’s program. Defendant instantly regretted pleading guilty and admitting to the allegations that he physically assaulted his ex-wife. While represented by new counsel, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, Defendant alleged that his prior attorney made certain representations to him, which caused him to plead guilty. The issue was whether the prior attorney’s representation to the Defendant amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel, which would invalidate the Defendant’s plea. Attorney Noonan filed a Motion to Withdraw the Pleas and requested a new trial, which was denied by the plea judge. Attorney Noonan appealed the plea judge’s decision to the Massachusetts Court of Appeals, who found that it was error to deny the Defendant’s motion. The Appeals Court vacated the denial of the Defendant’s motion and ordered a new hearing in the District Court to determine whether prior counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. It is important to note that the Defendant has not yet proven that prior counsel was ineffective, but the Appeals Court found that the Defendant raised enough of an argument to mandate an evidentiary hearing, with testimony, to determine whether prior counsel was, in fact, ineffective..
Plaintiff v. Brockton Police
Brockton District Court
CLIENT’S APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS DENIED DUE TO AN ARREST FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN CONVINCES THE COURT TO REVERSE THE DECISION AND HIS CLIENT HAS BEEN ISSUED AN LTC.
The client applied for a License to Carry Firearms. The police department denied the application because the client was arrested and charged with Assault & Battery and Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon stemming from a domestic violence incident. On appeal, Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the alleged victim of the domestic violence incident recanted and changed the story she provided to the police. Further, the alleged victim submitted an Affidavit in support of the client’s application for an LTC. The criminal charges were later dismissed. The police department never interviewed the alleged victim. After a hearing in which the Firearm Licensing Officer and the Client testified, the court agreed with Attorney Noonan that the decision to deny the application was arbitrary and without reasonable ground and the court issued an order for the Police Department to issue his client a License to Carry Firearms.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
Plymouth District Court
IN A HIGH PROFILE CASE, PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NOT GUILTY VERDICTS IN CASE OF STRANGULATION, ASSAULT & BATTERY, AND THREATS. CASE WAS FEATURED IN THE NEWS.
The client, a military veteran and retired pilot with no criminal record, was charged in the Plymouth District Court with criminal complaints of Assault & Battery (G.L. c. 265, §13A), Strangulation (G.L. c. 265, §15D), and Threats to Commit a Crime (G.L. 275, §2). The charges stem from an incident between the client and a teenager over a property dispute in Marshfield. The case was featured in Channel 7 News. The teenager reported to the police that the Defendant confronted him about trespassing on his property in Marshfield. The teenager reported that the Defendant grabbed him and threw him to the ground and proceeded to choke and strangle him by the neck while repeatedly threatening to kill him.
Result: At the jury trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan effectively cross-examined the alleged victim and thoroughly attacked his credibility and revealed a multitude of contradictory information and inconsistent statements. Attorney Noonan then called his client to the witness stand. The client denied assaulting, strangling, and threatening the alleged victim. After brief deliberations, the jury quickly returned not guilty verdicts on all charges.
https://whdh.com/news/marshfield-man-acquitted-in-assault-trial/
Commonwealth v. C.M.
Taunton District Court
DEFENDANT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT & BATTERY WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON ON A CHILD AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PRESENTS THE DEFENSE OF PARENTAL DISCIPLINE TO THE JURY.
The Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon on a Child under 14 pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §15A, which carries a maximum state prison sentence of 15 years. The evidence presented at trial was as follows: Defendant had several children, including the alleged victim, who was his 11 year-old son. The alleged victim testified that the Defendant became angry, pushed him, and struck him seven times in the buttocks with a wooden spoon. The Defendant struck the child so hard that the wooden spoon broke. At the police station, police took photographs of the injuries to the child, including numerous linear marks and bruises on the child’s buttocks, and a mark on his left shoulder. When questioned by police, Defendant stated that he spanked the child with his hand, and never used an object or wooden spoon.
Result: At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan and Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented the defense of parental discipline. In 2015, the Massachusetts Court recognized the defense of parental discipline in Commonwealth v. Dorvil, 472 Mass. 1 (2015), which provides that a parent, stepparent or guardian may use reasonable force against a minor child, under his care, if it is reasonable and reasonably related to a legitimate purpose. At trial, the defense introduced evidence that the child had a history of misbehavior. All disciplinary methods failed and the child’s misbehavior continued to escalate. On the weekend in question, the child was beating up his siblings on several occasions. The defendant placed the child in time-out and took away his privileges, which proved unsuccessful. In addition, the child’s grandmother attempted to correct his behavior with time-outs, but the child continued to act up. The defendant warned the child that if he continued to misbehave he would be spanked. The child continued to be rough with his younger siblings, and the Defendant took a wooden spoon and spanked him on the buttocks, over the child’s thick sweatpants. After the spanking, the child went upstairs and spoke with his grandmother. Although the child was initially upset and crying in the immediate aftermath, after his conversation with the grandmother, he was fine, no longer crying, and went to play with his sister, laughing along the way. Attorney Noonan argued that the marks to the child’s buttocks, and the pain from the spanking, was only temporary. The jury found the Defendant not guilty.
Commonwealth v. John Doe
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGE AGAINST ENGINEER DISMISSED AT CLERK MAGISTRATE HEARING UPON ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN’S REPRESENTATION.
Abington Police were dispatched to a residence for a reported domestic violence incident. Upon arrival, police spoke with the Defendant’s wife who alleged that the Defendant punched her in the face. Police observed an open wound to the alleged victim’s eyes, and observed that she was visibly upset and crying. Photographs were taken of the injuries to the alleged victim’s face. As a result, Defendant was charged with Assault and Battery on a Family / Household Member pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13M.
Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaint dismissed at the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing where Attorney Noonan asserted that the alleged victim had a Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and that she would be invoking her Marital Privilege by refusing to testify against her husband at trial. Attorney Noonan argued that, without the alleged victim’s testimony, there was insufficient evidence to prove that his client committed the Assault and Battery. The client had no criminal record. He has been gainfully employed as a Distribution Manager with a career goal of obtaining a professional engineering license. The issuance of a criminal complaint would have affected the Defendant’s ability to obtain a professional engineering license, and his ability to obtain future employment, all necessary to support his wife and two children. Attorney Noonan presented numerous character letters. After considering all the evidence, the Clerk-Magistrate dismissed the criminal complaint.
Commonwealth v. C.B.
Plymouth District Court
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGES DISMISSED UPON EVIDENCE THAT THE ALLEGED VICTIM HAD A 5TH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION.
Defendant’s longtime girlfriend called the police reporting that the Defendant physically assaulted her by punching her in the face multiple times. On the 911 call, the girlfriend was highly emotional, crying, and hysterical. She stated that the Defendant fled the home in his car. Upon arrival to the home, the girlfriend told the police that the Defendant pushed her into a wall. Police took photographs of a damaged wall. The girlfriend had an abrasion with dried blood on her elbow, but she did not have any marks to her face. Police located the Defendant at his place of work. Defendant stated that he never punched or struck his girlfriend. In fact, the girlfriend assaulted him, and he pushed her while attempting to escape from her. The girlfriend admitted that she pushed the Defendant first. The Defendant had visible injuries corroborating his claim that the girlfriend attacked him. Police took photos of the Defendant showing scratches on his chest, arms, neck, and back. Based on the statements of the girlfriend, Defendant was charged in the Plymouth District Court with Assault & Battery on a Family / Household Member pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §13M(a) and Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §15A(b).
Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan immediately scheduled the case for a bench trial. Attorney Noonan placed the Commonwealth on notice of his intent to raise self-defense and to introduce evidence that the girlfriend was the initial aggressor. Attorney Noonan argued that the alleged victim would incriminate herself were she to testify at trial because the evidence showed that she attacked the Defendant and inflicted injuries to his body, as evidenced by the injuries to the Defendant depicted in the photos. On the day of the bench trial, the Commonwealth dismissed all charges.