Case Results Crimes Against Property

CLIENT WHO CRASHED HIS CAR INTO A DITCH AND FLED THE SCENE BECAUSE HE HAD A REVOKED DRIVER’S LICENSE WILL HAVE ALL CHARGES DISMISSED AFTER 4 MONTHS SO LONG AS HE STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE AND PROVIDES PROOF THAT HIS DRIVER’S LICENSE IS REINSTATED.

Holbrook Police responded to a call for a motor vehicle in a ditch. When the police arrived, they could not locate the operator or any other occupants who may have been in the vehicle. Police located the vehicle’s registration showing that it was registered to the Defendant’s wife. Police located the wife and had her come to the police station for questioning. The wife told police that her husband, Defendant, had crashed the vehicle and fled the scene because he did not have a driver’s license. Defendant was charged with Operating with a Revoke Driver’s License, and Leaving the Scene of Property Damage.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his client has taken the steps to clear up his suspended driver’s license. The client owed money to the DMV in North Carolina and Attorney Noonan presented proof that his client paid his fees in full. Client owed money to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in Child Support and Attorney Noonan presented proof that the client paid his child support debts. Lastly, Attorney Noonan presented some evidence to show that his client completed classes that were ordered by the court in North Carolina for a previous driving related offense. The Clerk Magistrate agreed to dismiss the complaints after four months so long as the client stays out of trouble and provides the clerk with proof that his driver’s license is reinstated.

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 41 YEAR-OLD STATE EMPLOYEE WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD FOR LEAVING THE SCENE OF AN ACCIDENT WHILE CAUSING PROPERTY DAMAGE WILL BE DISMISSED OUTRIGHT IN ONE-YEAR SO LONG AS THE CLIENT STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE.

The Client was a 41-year-old state employee of Massachusetts who worked for the Department of Transportation and the Department of Children and Families and she had no criminal record. The Police Report states: A civilian witness reported that he was stopped in bumper-to-bumper traffic in Whitman when he was rear-ended by another vehicle. After the accident, the witness attempted to exchange information with the other driver, the Defendant, who refused to provide any information and then fled the scene in her vehicle. The other driver took a picture of the Defendant’s license plate and reported it to police. Police went to the Defendant’s home and observed damage to her vehicle. Defendant admitted that she was the driver and that she was in an accident. She stated that she thought she had exchanged her information but didn’t think the accident was her fault. The officer told her that she was the cause of the accident because she was following the other vehicle too closely. The Defendant became agitated and told the officer to leave her property.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented written statements of two witnesses, who were passengers in the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of this incident. Witness #1 stated that the other driver jumped out of his car and shoved the witness. The other driver became confrontational as Witness #1 took photos of the other driver’s vehicle, which did not appear to have any real damage. The other driver stated that he was going to call the police. The defendant and her party remained at the scene but the police never arrived so they left. Witness #2 confirmed that the other jumped out of his car and shoved Witness #1. Witness #2 stated that they waited at the scene for 30 minutes but the police never came. Witness #2 was recovering from recent heart surgery and requested that the Defendant take her home because she was shaken up by the event and wasn’t feeling well. The Defendant is a 41 year-old state employee who worked for the Mass. Department of Transportation and the Department of Children and Families. She had no criminal record. The issuance of the criminal complaint would have affected the Defendant’s employment with the State. After hearing, the Clerk-Magistrate decided to keep the criminal charge of Leaving the Scene of Property Damage open for one-year to be dismissed after that time so long as the Defendant stays out of trouble. The Defendant was ordered to pay $80 in fines.

DEFENDANT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF 2 OUT OF 4 FELONIES FOR CAUSING MALICIOUS DAMAGE TO PROPERTY ON 4 SEPARATE OCCASIONS, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE VICTIMS, EXCEEDED $101,000 IN DAMAGES.

Defendant, a 50-year-old resident of West Bridgewater, was charged with 4 counts of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250. Defendant worked for a company for 30 years and he was fired. After his termination, Defendant, on four separate occasions, intentionally inflicted damage to the company’s out-door industrial air chiller. The company claimed that the damage caused by the Defendant exceeded $101,000 dollars. After each act of vandalism, the company reported it to West Bridgewater Police. The company suspected that it was the Defendant who caused the damage. The company installed cameras to catch the Defendant in the act. The Defendant was caught on video causing damage to the air chiller and was arrested the following day. Prior to trial, the District Attorney’s Office offered the Defendant the following deal: Plead Guilty to all 4 felony charges of Malicious Destruction of Property over $250, be placed on probation for two years, and to pay restitution to be later determined at a hearing. Despite the evidence showing the Defendant was caught on videotape causing damage to the air chiller, and other strong evidence showing his guilt, Defendant opted to go to trial.

Result: At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan challenged the Commonwealth’s evidence that each act of vandalism caused at least $250 in damage even though the alleged victim’s claimed that the damage exceeded $100,000. With regards to 2 of the acts of vandalism, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to convince the jury that the Commonwealth failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the damage exceeded $250. Instead of taking the Commonwealth’s deal to plead guilty to all 4 felony counts, Defendant was acquitted and found Not Guilty of 2 of the felony counts. Attorney Noonan was weary to have his client plead guilty to all 4 counts because the company could use his admissions against him when they seek $101,000 in restitution from the Defendant. The Defendant was given a suspended sentence with probation for two years, a sentence not all that much different from what the Commonwealth was asking for prior to trial.

FELONY DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY CHARGE AGAINST 35-YEAR-OLD COMPUTER PROGRAMMER IS DISMISSED AT CLERK MAGISTRATE’S HEARING AND NO CRIMINAL CHARGE WILL BE ON CLIENT’S RECORD.

The Police Report states: a Brockton City employee was snow plowing a residential street in Brockton when the Defendant, who was standing at the end of his driveway with a shovel, struck the City vehicle with his shovel causing $1,000 in damage to the vehicle. At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented his client’s side of the story. The Client was shoveling his driveway. The conditions were very snowy and there was poor visibility. As the client was shoveling snow at the end of his driveway, he saw a snow plow driving in his direction. The client saw that the snow plow was driving very close to the side of the street and he believed that the snow plow might drive across or into the client’s driveway. The client raised his shovel to warn the snow plow driver that he is coming too close to his driveway. As the snow plow passed by, it was very close to the client’s driveway, and as the client was holding his shovel up in the air to warn the driver, the shovel struck the side of the truck.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his client did not intend to damage the truck and only struck the truck with his shovel because he believed that the truck might hit him. At the hearing, the snow plow driver stated that the damage to his truck was $1,500 but Attorney Noonan argued that hitting the side of this heavy-duty truck with a shovel would not cause that much damage. Attorney Noonan convinced the Clerk Magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint upon the client’s payment of $250 for the damage to the truck.

Docket No.: 1515 CR 4971

MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED upon MOTION
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED upon MOTION
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED upon MOTION
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED upon MOTION

Defendant was charged with four felony counts of Malicious Destruction of Property. The allegations were that the Defendant was terminated from the Company he was employed at for over 30 years. The police report alleges that the Defendant vandalized the Company’s outdoor air chiller unit on at least four different occasions. The company told police that the equipment was vital to the day to day operation of the business. The company alleged that they had to shut down production due to the vandalism. The company claimed that the value of the damage caused by the Defendant was approximately $102,000.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed. Attorney Noonan argued that the police report failed to present sufficient probable cause to support each element of the felony offenses.

MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED
RESISTING ARREST: DISMISSED

A homeowner called police to report that a male had just ripped off his mailbox. Upon arrival, police located the male matching the description. Upon spotting him, the male fled into the woods and police chased him. During the chase, police tackled him to the ground and the male flailed his arms striking the officer in the head and shoulder. The male broke away and continued to flee into the woods. The officer attempted to tackle him several times but the male pushed him away. Finally, the officer tackled the male to the ground and delivered two fist strikes to his head. Afterwards, police learned that the male destroyed nine mailboxes. The male, a juvenile, was charged with Malicious Destruction of Property (felony) and Resisting Arrest. The juvenile had no prior criminal record. He was a standout athlete on the football team at his high school. The juvenile met with a Marine Corp. recruiter and signed a letter of intention to enlist. If the juvenile were convicted or given of CWOF for the felony offenses, he would be disqualified from military service. Moreover, if the juvenile were placed on Pretrial Probation, he would be disqualified from military. The only disposition that would not disqualify from military serve was an outright dismissal of the charges. After much work, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan and Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the Commonwealth to dismiss all charges outright. Now, the client can pursue his dream of serving in the military.

Result: Charges dismissed outright and juvenile can now pursue his dream of enlisting in military.

TRESPASS: CWOF (9 months, admin. probation, $734.00 restitution)
VANDALISM: DISMISSED
BREAKING & ENTERING: DISMISSED
POSSESSION OF LIQUOR: DISMISSED

Plymouth Police were dispatched to a vacant residence after receiving a call that a male and female were seen walking up the driveway of the vacant home holding rocks. Police discovered 14 teenagers inside the home, including the Defendant. Police observed severe damage to the home, including trash thrown around, tagging of a red penis inside the front door, dirt in every room, pasta thrown on the kitchen floor, burned pieces of wood in the living room, a swastika painted on the bedroom wall, the words “No Jews Allowed” spray painted on the bedroom wall, testicles painted on the bedroom wall. Police arrested 14 teenagers including the Defendant. The Commonwealth estimated the damage at approximately $50,000.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that there was insufficient evidence to charge his client as being a joint-venturer in the crimes, as the evidence merely showed that the Defendant was present at the scene of the crime and something more was required.

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY: DISMISSED
LARCENY FALSE PRETENSE: DISMISSED

Client was charged with Receiving Stolen Property over $250, a felony offense, stemming from allegations that she stole three pieces of jewelry from the alleged victim totaling approximately $5,430, including a gold Claddagh ring (valued at $100), a diamond pendant necklace with a gold necklace (valued at $130), a 14K gold diamond anniversary band ring (valued at $2,200), and a 14K gold teardrop solitaire ring (valued at $2,000-$3,000). The client then allegedly pawned the jewelry, claiming to be the rightful owner of the property, and received payment resulting in an additional charge of Larceny by False Pretense.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to get all criminal charges dismissed outright at the second court date.

BREAKING & ENTERING FOR FELONY: DISMISSED

Police responded to the breaking and entering in progress. Upon arrival to the home, police detained a man walking across the front lawn. The man confessed to breaking into the home to steal $10,000 and stated that he committed the crime with two friends named Kevin and Andrew. A short distance away, police observed two males walking on the sidewalk. They were identified as Kevin and Andrew and were placed under arrest as joint venturers in the house break. In his Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Noonan argued that his client’s mere presence at the crime scene (without any other corroborative evidence of his involvement) was insufficient to charge him as a joint venturer.

Result: After Hearing, Attorney Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and the felony B & E charge was dismissed.

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.

ASSAULT & BATTERY ON PUBLIC OFFICIAL: PRETRIAL PROBATION
RESISTING ARREST: PRETRIAL PROBATION
DISORDERLY CONDUCT: PRETRIAL PROBATION
VANDALISM: PRETRIAL PROBATION

Client, sophomore at Wheaton College, was arrested by campus police stemming from an incident in which Defendant smashed a bathroom mirror in a dormitory during an argument with his girlfriend. Upon arrival, Defendant yelled profanities at the campus police. Defendant kicked one campus police officer three times. Defendant was placed under arrest at which point Defendant pushed a campus police officer and continually resisted arrest. After his arraignment, Defendant retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan. The campus police and department of public safety refused to a proposal to place Defendant on pretrial probation. Wheaton College also revoked Defendant’s scholarship and permanently suspended him from the school. As a result, the Commonwealth only offered Defendant a continuance without a finding on the charges. Attorney Patrick met with school officials and the dean of students at Wheaton College in an effort to persuade them to place Defendant on pretrial probation. Attorney Noonan eventually persuaded Wheaton College, Campus Police, and the District Attorney’s Office to place Defendant on pretrial probation.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuades the government to place his client on pretrial probation for two-years at the conclusion of which all criminal charges will be dismissed outright, and client does not have to admit guilt. Client may report on job applications that he does not have any convictions.

LEAVING THE SCENE PROPERTY DAMAGE: DISMISSED

Client, 33 year-old machine operator, was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident Causing Property Damage stemming from a hit and run incident. An off-duty detective observed the Defendant’s vehicle rear-end another vehicle at an intersection and then flee the scene. The off-duty detective pursued and apprehended the Defendant. Defendant admitted to fleeing the scene. The damage to the other vehicle amounted to $4,000.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtains an outright dismissal of the criminal charge at the first court date.

BREAKING & ENTERING for FELONY: DISMISSED
MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED
LEAVING THE SCENE of PROPERTY DAMAGE: DISMISSED

Client, a social worker with no criminal record, was arrested on New Year’s Eve stemming from an incident in which she rammed her vehicle through the garage of her ex-fiancé’s house causing extensive damage. The homeowner called the Police who arrested the Defendant at gunpoint. Client retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan after she was arraigned on the charges. Homeowner obtained an emergency restraining order against the Defendant.

Result: Through extensive negotiation with the District Attorney’s Office, the Police Prosecutor, and the Homeowner, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to get all criminal charges dismissed at the first court date.

LEAVING SCENE OF PROPERTY DAMAGE: DISMISSED

Client, a professional truck driver of 40 years, was charged with Leaving the Scene of Property Damage. Defendant worked for a tractor-trailer company. He was dispatched to deliver a 60-foot trailer to a residence in Canton. On the way to the residence, Defendant struck a large overhanging tree limb, which remained on the top of the trailer. The tree limb then pulled down cable wires from two residences. At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan introduced evidence that the Defendant was unaware that he struck the tree limb and cable wires. Photographs showed the large size of the trailer. Photos of the side mirrors show that it would have been impossible for the Defendant to see the tree limb.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuades Clerk-Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint against professional truck driver of 40 years.

LEAVING SCENE OF PROPERTY DAMAGE: DISMISSED at TRIAL

Client, 29-year-old truck driver with no criminal record, was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident causing Property Damage stemming from a two-car crash in North Easton. The victim identified the suspect vehicle by its registration before it fled the scene. The Defendant was the registered owner of the suspect vehicle that fled the scene after the crash. At trial, the Commonwealth sought to introduce the Defendant’s motor vehicle registration in order to identify him as the driver of the fleeing vehicle. At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan excluded the vehicle registration from evidence on the grounds that it was not provided timely. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan then moved to dismiss the case because, without the vehicle’s registration, the Commonwealth had insufficient evidence to identify the Defendant as the operator of the fleeing vehicle.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets criminal complaint dismissed outright at trial.

LEAVING SCENE OF ACCIDENT: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Client, 40-year-old physician’s assistant with no prior criminal record, was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident stemming from an alleged hit and run accident. A docketed arraignment on this charge would result in the client’s termination from employment, as he is subject to mandatory background checks from his employer. A docketed arraignment on the charge constitutes a crime of moral turpitude and is grounds for termination.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismisses criminal complaint prior to arraignment saving client’s job as Physician’s Assistant.

MALICIOUS DESTRUCTION: DISMISSED at CLERK’S HEARING

Client, 39 year-old machine operator, charged with Malicious Destruction of Property over $250 (felony) stemming from an altercation in which he punched and damaged the hood of the alleged victim’s Honda SUV. Prior to the hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained documentation from the insurance company because the alleged victim filed a property damage claim for the damage sustained to the hood of his car. At the hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that the damage to the hood was non-existent and not visible based on the photographs taken by the insurance company. Attorney Noonan argued that the alleged victim had a motive to paint the Defendant in a negative light for purposes of a child custody battle.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan convinces Clerk-Magistrate not to issue a criminal complaint on the felony property damage charge.

BREAKING & ENTERING FOR FELONY: DISMISSED upon MOTION

Client, a juvenile, was charged with Breaking and Entering with the Intent to Commit a Felony stemming from an incident in which he allegedly smashed the window of a vacant building an entered with another youth. Through a Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that the juvenile did not have the requisite intent to a commit a felony therein at the time of the breaking and entering. Rather, the juvenile’s intent was to commit the misdemeanor offense of Trespassing at the time of the Breaking & Entering.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets aggravated Felony B & E charge dismissed and amended down to Misdemeanor B & E charge.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

DESPITE DEFENDANT’S CONFESSION TO STEALING $8,000 FROM HIS EMPLOYER, ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS LARCENY CASE DISMISSED AT TRIAL.

Defendant, a Brockton man, worked for a business in Brockton. An investigator for the company found that the Defendant was stealing from the business in excess of $8,000. The investigator gathered all records and documents showing the Defendant’s thefts from the business. The investigator provided the police with all the documents detailing the employee theft. At the police station, Defendant admitted that he stole the money. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in getting the Defendant’s confession suppressed after proving that the police officer did not read the Defendant his Miranda rights. The District Attorney’s Office still had enough evidence to prosecute the Defendant for the crime of Larceny over $250 (G.L. c. 265, §30).

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan prepared the case for trial. Attorney Noonan was prepared to move the Court to exclude from evidence the documents from the investigator, which purportedly showed the Defendant’s thefts from the business on the grounds that the documents were not admissible as business records. Attorney Noonan was prepared to present evidence that the Commonwealth would be unable to prove all the essential elements of a Larceny beyond a reasonable doubt. On the first trial date, the investigator appeared in court and was ready to testify but the trial was continued due to court congestion. On the second trial date, the Commonwealth got the trial continued, over the objection of the defense, because a witness was on vacation. On the third trial date, the trial got continued due to court congestion. On the fourth trial date, the investigator did not appear because he had a job training that day. Attorney Noonan moved to dismiss the case for lack of prosecution, as the Commonwealth was not ready for trial.