For more recent wins, click here.
2013 Case Wins
Dec 2013
Charge: OUI 2nd Offense
Court: Uxbridge District Court
Result: Case dismissed at Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing.
The police were called by an off duty police officer reporting an accident involving a motor scooter, and a person who appeared to be injured at the scene. Our client a 25 year old male was found by the police next to the scooter wearing a helmet and smelling of marijuana. He was not very cooperative when questioned by the police and during the conversation he started to remove his clothes. The officer informed him that an ambulance was on its way and asked our client if he had been drinking and he said he had 6 beers.
When the EMTs arrived he admitted to them that he was intoxicated but did not want to go to the hospital. The EMT’s finally convinced him and he was transported to the hospital for his injuries. The police searched the scooter and our client’s clothes and found a small amount of marijuana. The police told our client before he was transported that they would be subpoenaing his medical records. They charged him with a Second Offense OUI, and told him he had to appear before a Magistrate.
At the clerk’s hearing Attorney Matson pointed out that our client was never asked if he was driving the scooter or if it was his, he was just at the scene. Because of this the clerk dismissed the charges.
—
Charges: Drug Possession
Court: Chelsea District Court
Result: Case dismissed at Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing.
Our client a 40 year old woman was charged with possession of a class B and E substances after she was pulled over in Chelsea at 2 in the morning. The police pulled her over because she made an illegal left turn. As she was talking to the officer he saw that she was disoriented. The officer also saw a baggie full of white pills.
She was charged with an illegal left turn and later summoned to court for a Show Cause Hearing for Possession of the Class B and E substances.
At the Clerks Hearing Attorney Matson argued successfully and the charges were dismissed
November 2013
Charge: Leaving the Scene
Court: East Boston District Court
Result: No Complaint Issued at Hearing, dismissed.
My client was about to pull onto a highway onramp, missed the exit, backed up and struck another vehicle, and left the scene. The other driver got her license plate and reported it.
The charge ended up being dismissed, which was extremely important since she had a previous DUI charge on her record. Had the case gone ahead, she may have had some additional license loss.
—
Charge: Operating on a Suspended License (2 counts)
Court: Lynn District Court
Result: Charges Dismissed, no Additional Loss of License
Our client a 25 year old accountant was charged with Operating after Suspension twice in the same week. The second time he was pulled over he admitted to the police he knew he did not have a valid license. He was arrested for the offence.
I was able to work out a deal at pretrial to dismiss both charges, with no additional license loss. Our client will have no record of these incidents.
—
Charge: Open and Gross Lewdness
Court: Northhampton District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation, No Admission of Guilt
Our client was accused of Open and Gross Lewdness for allegedly exposing himself and touching himself in public. Our Client a 40 year old male was accused of masturbating in front of two women on the street. The police found our client sitting on the sidewalk, one of the women he exposed himself to identified him and he was arrested for open and gross lewdness. At the hearing the two victims deeply expressed their desire to have our client go to jail.
Attorney Matson, persuaded the judge that this was an isolated incident and the judge gave our client pretrial probation. If he completes counseling and stays out of trouble for a year, it will be wiped off his record as though it never happened. Because of Attorney Matson our client avoided jail time and a criminal record.
October 2013
Charge: Possession of a Knife
Court: East Boston District Court
Result: Dismissed Prior to Arraignment
September 2013
Charge: Minor in Possession of Alcohol
Court: Belchertown District Court
Result: Pretrial Diversion, Arrest Record Cleared after 4 months
Description: Client was found near alcohol in the trunk of a car at Umass-Amherst, and was charged with being a Minor in Possession of Alcohol.
Attorney Matson negotiated a pretrial diversion, which results in no criminal record, and is not found guilty of any crime. There will be no record that the case ever went to court as long as he stays out of trouble for 4 months and attends 6 Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.
—
Charge: Leaving the Scene of an Accident (Hit & Run)
Court: Dedham District Court
Result: No Complaint Issued (Case Dismissed)
Description: The client was responsible for the accident, and did not exchange papers with the other person. But the clerk agreed that the client would not face a criminal charge if she paid restitution and stays out of trouble. Fortunately, Clerk Magistrates have discretion in these cases, and can choose not to put a criminal charge in the system, even if the person is likely guilty on the facts.
In this case, The police alleged that our client a 27 year old business owner hit and damaged a vehicle in a mall lot, then fled the scene without stopping. She hired the Law Office of Russell Matson to represent her. At the clerk magistrate’s hearing, Attorney Matson persuaded the clerk magistrate that no complaint should issued against or client. As long as Client avoids further criminal charges and pays restitution, this application for complaint will be dismissed in three months.
As a result, it will never be discoverable on any background check.
Charges: OUI 3rd Offense, OUI w Child Endangerment, 2 counts
Court: Framingham District Court
Result: Not Guilty
Description: Our client a 47 male was arrested for OUI 3rd Offense/Child Endangerment 2 Counts, after being observed by police swerving in and out of lanes into oncoming traffic. When he was pulled over, the police smelled alcohol and our client admitted he had been drinking at dinner with his wife and two children. He was arrested and his wife took the children home. At the police station, our client, to make matters worse was belligerent and non compliant with the officers requests.
Result: At a jury trial Attorney Fasoldt convinced the jury that the commonwealth did not have a case. The verdict was NOT GUILTY on all three counts.
—
Charges: Leaving the Scene of an Accident
Court: Milford District Court
Result: No Criminal Complaint Issued (Dismissed)
Description: Client, a 21 year-old man on vacation in Massachusetts hit a parked car and in a moment of panic, fled the scene. The damage to his car was so extensive that he lost a tire and drove on its rim to the motel he was staying at a few miles down the road. The police found our client at his motel and he allegedly admitted to the police that he hit the car and wanted to apologize to the owner. The police issued him a criminal citation for Leaving the Scene.
At the Clerk’s Hearing Attorney Matson convinced the clerk to not go forward with a criminal charge. No complaint was issued, and the case was dismissed.
—
July 2013
Charges: Possession of False ID (Felony)
Court: Attleboro District Court
Result: No Felony Criminal Complain Issued at Clerk’s Hearing
Description: Client, an underage girl, was caught by police drinking at a concert with her friends. The police found a substantial quantity of alcohol at the scene and a fake ID belonging to our client.
She was arrested for Possession of a False ID which is a felony charge. The client’s parents hired The Law Office of Russell Matson to represent her at a Clerk’s Hearing. Attorney Matson persuaded the clerk to dismiss the felony charge — so that charge will never appear on her criminal record.
The parents being present at the hearing was almost certainly helpful, as the clerk heard the serious punishments and restrictions being issued by the parents.
July 2013
Charges: Willful Destruction of Property
Court: Boston Municipal Court – Roxbury
Result: Charge Dismissed
Description: After getting into a verbal argument with his girlfriend, our client a 32 yr old man broke several items in her apartment, including teacups and a glass vase. The police were called to the scene by a neighbor who heard noise coming from the apartment.
When the police arrived our client tried to flee but was immediately apprehended and charged with Willful Destruction of Property. At court we convinced the judge to drop all charges.
—
July 2013
Charges: Assault and Battery – Records Sealed
Court: Waltham District Court
Result: Case Permanently Sealed
Description: Client, a 22 year-old law student originally hired The Law Office of Russell Matson to represent her on the charge of Assault and Battery. Our firm obtained a dismissal of the charge, so the Client re-hired the firm to petition the court to seal her record. The firm persuaded the court to seal all records of the case.
More info on how we can help get records sealed.
—
Charges: Open and Gross Lewdness
Court: Edgartown (Martha’s Vineyard) District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation, Case to be Dismissed After 3 Months
Description: Our client a 39 year old man who was publicly intoxicated and witnessed by many people urinating on the sidewalk with his penis in full view. The police found him sitting on the ground in a puddle swaying back in forth obviously displaying signs of intoxication. He was arrested for Open and Gross Lewdness and transported to jail.
At our client’s arraignment Attorney Matson was able to get him 3 months of pretrial probation and then the case would be dismissed.
—
March 2013
Charges: Witness Intimidation, Assault and Battery
Court: Somerville District Court
Result: Case Dismissed
Description: One night Mr. V. and his wife fought. The fight turned ugly. The police arrived. Mr. V’s wife told police that her husband punched her and threatened to kill her if he called the police. Mr. V was arrested and charged with assault and battery and witness intimidation.
Under Massachusetts law a husband/wife cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse – that is known as the “Marital Privilege.” At the second, court date Mr. V’s wife invoked her marital privilege. In this case, no evidence existed beyond the testimony of the wife – the police cannot testify as to what the wife told them; that is inadmissible hearsay.
With no evidence remaining, the case was dismissed.
—
Feb 2013
Charges: Possession w/ Intent to Distribute Class D (Marijuana)
Court: Taunton District Court
Result: Motion Allowed. Case Dismissed
Description: Mr. B, a 20-year-old chef, was in the car with his friend late at night, driving. The local police pulled him over for having a defective license plate light. While Mr. B gathered his license and registration, the officer smelled an odor of “fresh marijuana.” Upon detecting this odor the officer requested that Mr. B and his passenger get out of the car. They complied.
The officer and his partner searched the car; they found several small plastic bags containing marijuana and a black digital scale. Mr. B made no incriminating statements. Mr. B was charged with Possession w/ Intent to Distribute a Class D Drug, to wit Marijuana. Henry filed a Motion to Suppress the evidence, arguing that the mere odor of Marijuana – be it fresh or burnt – was not enough to justify ordering the occupants out of the car; nor was it sufficient to justify the subsequent search.
Henry relied on the recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case of Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (2011). The judge agreed. The Motion to Suppress was allowed. The evidence was suppressed. The case was dismissed.
2012 Case Wins
December 2012
Charges: Vandalism, Attempted Breaking and Entering
Court: Quincy District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation, Case to be Dismissed, No Admission on Record
Description: Mr. M, a 21-year-old skateboarder, was intoxicated and looking to go to a specific house party. Unfortunately, he went to the wrong house. In his stupor, he broke a porch light and tried to open the door to the house. The owner called police, came outside, and held Mr. M on the ground. Mr. M was unaware of what he had done. It was clear that Mr. M had issues with alcohol. As part of his conditions of release he was required to attend AA meetings everyday. Mr. M showed a lot of remorse and made it clear that he wanted to pay back the value of the light that was damaged.
The prosecutor recognized that Mr. M’s issue was not one of criminality but one of alcoholism. She agreed to place Mr. M on pretrial probation for one year with the conditions that he remain alcohol-free and pay restitution to the owner of the home.
—
Charges: License Suspension Appeal Petition
Court: Chelsea District Court
Result: CTR Petition Allowed, Judge Reversed RMV’s Decision
Description: Mr. Q is a commercial truck driver. Several months ago he was sleeping in his truck in a private parking lot. The police pulled him out of his truck and arrested him for OUI. At the police station Mr. Q refused the chemical breath test. Under Massachusetts law, refusing a breath test results in a 6-month suspension of the regular driver’s license and a 1-year suspension of the commercial driver’s license (CDL). The prosecutors dismissed the OUI case, and the 6-month suspension was lifted, but, unfortunately, the CDL suspension remained. In an effort to get Mr. Q’s license back we appealed the Chemical Test Refusal (CTR) at the RMV. The RMV denied the appeal.
We “petitioned” the District Court, asking the judge to reverse the RMV’s ruling. The basis for our petition was that the police did not have probable cause to arrest Mr. Q because he was not parked in a “public way.” The judge agreed and reversed the RMV’s decision. Now, it is on the record that the CTR suspension should not have been entered in the first place; therefore, his CDL should be reinstated.
—
Charges: Kidnapping, Witness Intimidation, Assault and Battery, Threats
Court: Falmouth District Court
Result: Dismissed, Dismissed, CWOF, CWOF
Description: This was a case of a domestic dispute turned ugly, then getting way out-of-hand. A concerned neighbor called the police after hearing a loud screaming match. The police arrived and determined that there was no physical abuse, so they left without charging anyone with any crimes.
Six days after the fight, client, a 42-year-old IT consultant, was charged with a number of crimes, including allegations of Kidnapping and Witness Intimidation – very serious felonies. It turned out that his girlfriend had gone to the police again and changed her story.
She told the police that my client had held her against her will, taken her phone, beat her and threatened to kill her. My client, by this point, had gone back to his home state. We were able to bring the client back to court on his own to answer to the charges; he was then allowed to return home while the case was pending. After several months of legal wrangling, the government agreed to drop the felony charges in exchange for my client’s admission to the Assault and Battery and Threats charges.
Dec 2012
Charges: Assault
Court: Brookline District Court
Result:Dismissed
Description: This was a case that never should have been brought in the first place. My client and his wife had a disagreement in their apartment about one of their children and an upcoming birthday party. The disagreement turned heated and my client threw the TV remote and kicked the TV stand. He also shook his hands in the air as he yelled. He did not touch his wife nor did he threaten to harm her. Nevertheless, the police showed up.
Out of an abundance, of caution my client was arrested and charged with assault. My client’s wife, although shaken from the fight, did not want her husband to be charged. In fact, she came to court and stated on the record that she did not wish to testify against her husband. The case was dismissed.
November 2012
Charges: Possession of Class A and Class B Controlled Substance
Court: Holyoke District Court
Result: Dismissed
Description: Mr. D was stopped by police after he was seen walking out of a building in a “high-crime area” in downtown Holyoke. The officers asked him what he was doing. Mr. D replied that he was just visiting a friend. Mr. D was holding his right hand in a fist – the police asked him to open his hand. When he did it revealed two plastic baggies, one containing Heroin, the other Cocaine.
Mr. D was charged with Possession of Class A and B substances. A Motion to Suppress was filed based on the officers’ lack of reasonable suspicion to stop Mr. D. The motion was allowed and the case was dismissed.
October 2012
Charges: OUI 1st
Court: Lawrence District Court
Result: Not Guilty
Description: Client, a 28-year-old social worker, fell asleep at the wheel around 4am. He was driving south on I-495 at 25 mph. A State Trooper stopped him. When speaking with my client, the trooper detected signs of alcohol impairment — odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes.
When my client got out of the car he was unsteady on his feet. He failed the FSTs. During the cross-examination of the trooper, I was able to show that all the observations made by the trooper were consistent with being tired, and not necessarily consistent with being impaired by alcohol. The jury agreed. They found my client Not Guilty.
October 2012
Charges: Malicious Destruction of Property, Defacing Property, Conspiracy to Deface Property, Trespass
Court: Fall River District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation – charges to be dismissed after 6 months
Description: Client, a 20-year-old mechanic/musician, was arrested, along with 4 other young guys, for vandalizing a local school. Specifically, they were accused of throwing toilet paper on the trees and school buses as well as locking the school doors with bicycle locks.
After being held in jail for six days, we were able to get him released. On the next court date the prosecutor agreed to place my client and the co-defendants on Pretrial Probation (PTP). Under the terms of the PTP, my client must perform 40 hours of community service and not get into trouble for 6 months. So long as he complies the case will be dismissed.
October 2012
Charges: Leaving The Scene of an Accident
Court: Woburt District Court
Result: Complaint not Issued
Description: Client, a 23-year-old Air Force Sergeant, was cited for Leaving the Scene of a Property Damage Accident. The accident occurred around 5:00am on Rte 128. My client swerved after he was cut off by another vehicle. He struck some construction equipment on the side of the highway and was injured. He walked to the nearby Mobil Station and called for his friend to pick him up. He was then driven to a hospital and treated.
The state police found his car and cited him for leaving the scene. At a Clerk’s Hearing, my client explained what happened. The clerk remarked that my client was lucky to be alive. The complaint was not issued; my client will not face criminal charges.
July 2012
Charges: Indecent Exposure
Court: Attleboro District Court
Result: Dismissed
Description: Client, a 57-year-old mechanic, was charged with Indecent Exposure. Standing outside his car at a rest area, a state trooper saw client with his pants down. Client’s rear-end was exposed. Client told the trooper that he was urinating. The trooper did not believe Client. In any event, the trooper only saw Client’s buttocks; he DID NOT see client’s genitals. Case law in Massachusetts says that the exposure of a person’s buttocks is not indecent exposure (but it could be the different crime of Open and Gross Lewdness). After a lengthy discussion with the prosecutor, it was agreed that the case should be dismissed.
—
Charges: OUI-5th Offense
Court: Wrentham District Court
Result: Reduced to 2nd Offense (avoids felony conviction)
Description: Client, a 49-year-old mother, was charged with a 5th Offense OUI, after driving around a roadblock. She faced a possible mandatory minimum sentence of 2 years in jail. A lengthy investigation by attorney Fasoldt showed that Client did not have as many priors as the government alleged. Accordingly, she had her case reduced to a 2nd offense.
—
Charges: Operating After Suspension (2 counts)
Court: Fall River District Court
Result: Dismissed (both counts)
Description: Client, a 20-year-old mechanic, was caught driving his truck on two separate occasions. Client missed his court date and a warrant was issued. Client hired Henry to help remove the warrant and resolve the cases. Henry walked client in to court for the afternoon session. After discussing the cases with the prosecutor, the cases were dismissed with court costs.
—
May 2012
Charges: Possession of a Class A Drug (Heroin)
Court: Holyoke District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation, Dismissal after 6 months.
Description: A client, a 25-year old male, was charged with Possession of a Class A Drug, specifically Heroin, in the Holyoke District Court. On the pretrial court date, we were able to work out a deal where the client was put on pretrial probation for six months, with the condition of drug screens. This deal was perfect for our client, who was on the verge of finishing college and moving out of state. Pretrial probation will result in a dismissal of the charge after the six-month period. Thus, our client will walk away with neither a conviction nor an admission on the offense.
—
Charges: Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Court: Fall River District Court
Result: Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing : Complaint Not Issued, No Charges Filed
Description: Client, a 22-year-old college student, was involved in a motor-vehicle accident. His car rear-ended the car in front of him. This happened after my client pulled his car over to allow the car that was behind him to pass. After the car passed my client pulled back into traffic; as he did, the other vehicle slammed on its brakes. My client was not able to stop in time – he rear-ended the car. The officer issued a citation for negligent operation. The driver of the other vehicle got out of his car and punched my client in the face. The other driver was subsequently charged with Assault and Battery.
At a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing the clerk determined that my client did nothing wrong, and therefore, there was no probable cause to issue the complaint.
April 2012
Charges: Possession with Intent to Distribute Class D Substance (Marijuana), School Zone Drug Charge
Court: Malden District Court
Result: Plea and Dismissal — no jail time, no conviction
Description: Client, a 19-year-old male college student, was stopped in his car when the police noticed that his license plate light was not illuminated. Client’s window would not roll down, so he opened the door to speak with the police. The officer noticed several plastic bags in the door. When asked, client told the police that he had some weed on him.
Client then handed a backpack to the officer. Inside the bag was marijuana, a scale and a ledger. Client’s car passed within 100 feet of a school/park zone. After lengthy negotiations with the prosecutors, it was agreed that the school zone charge would be dismissed. This was particularly favorable to the client as a school zone conviction carries a mandatory 2-year jail sentence.
At the plea hearing, the prosecutor, however, requested that the client be found Guilty of the Possession w/ Intent to Distribute charge. Attorney Fasoldt asked for a CWOF. The judge adopted Attorney Fasoldt’s recommendation and Continued the Case Without a Finding (CWOF’d) for 1 year. This was especially helpful for the client, as he avoided a felony conviction.
March 2012
Charges: Resisting Arrest, OUI-2nd Offense
Court:
Ayer District Court
Result: Not Guilty on both counts
Description: Client, a 50-year-old male, was stopped in his silver convertible sports car because the officer “estimated” client’s speed to be too fast. At trial, the officer testified that my client’s eyes were extremely bloodshot, his speech was thick-tongued, and he had a very stong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his breath.
My client admitted to playing golf with his brothers and having two beers after the match. After being taken out of the car, my client was accused of “raising his arms to the police” and pulling away from them. At trial, my client testified that the facts stated by the police were largely incorrect. In addition, my client’s brother and girlfriend testified. The jury found my client not guilty on both counts.
—
Charges: OUI
Court: Ayer District Court
Result: Dismissed (after Motion to Suppress was allowed)
Description: Client, a 44-year-old woman, was stopped for speeding and crossing the marked lanes. After making contact with my client, the officer held my client at the roadside and called for back-up. The officer DID NOT observed bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, or an odor of alcohol. However, the officer who arrived on the scene observed all such signs.
My client failed all the FSTs. A Motion to Suppress the exit order was Allowed. The judge held that my client should have simply been given a ticket and released as the first officer did not have probable cause to have my client taken out of the car. The case was dismissed.
—
Charges: Assault w/ a Dangerous Weapon, Larceny
Court: Cambridge District Court
Result: Not Guilty on both counts
Description: Client, 27-year-old male, was charged with Assault w/a Dangerous Weapon and Larceny following an incident at a restaurant in Cambridge. Client was out to dinner with his companion. Following a heated argument with his friend, Client got up from the table, upset and crying, and left the restaurant. The friend followed him outside. The bill was left unpaid.
Client got into the car, the friend got in a couple minutes later. They drove off together. A restaurant worker said that their car almost ran him over on the way out of the parking lot. Attempting to pay the bill, Client returned to the restaurant several times in the following weeks and called on numerous occasions. For whatever reason, the restaurant did not allow him to pay.
The client was found Not Guilty on both counts at a bench trial.
—
Wrentham District Court
Charge: OUI-Drugs
Result: Dismissed
Description: Client, a 24-year-old man, was stopped after he was seen swerving across the marked lanes. The officer noticed the standard signs of alcohol impairment – slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, strong odor of alcohol, unsteady on feet. He failed the FSTs. However, a breath test revealed a Blood-Alcohol Level of 0.02%, well below the legal limit for alcohol impairment.
The client told the officer that he had taken two percocets before he drove. A search of the vehicle revealed a bottle of percocets that were not prescribed to him. The case was dismissed upon the client admitting to being in possession of the percocets.
Result: Dismissed
—
Lawrence District Court
OUI-1st Offense
Dismissed
Description: Client, a 28-year-old male, was driving south on I-495 between 25 and 30mph – well below the 65mph speed limit. His car was swerving between the marked lanes. He was pulled over by a state trooper. My client told the trooper that he was “sorry” and that he was falling asleep. The trooper noticed all the standard signs of alcohol impairment (slurred speech, bloodshot/glassy eyes, odor of alcohol, unsteadiness on his feet).
He submitted to field sobriety tests, which, according to the trooper, he did not perform satisfactorily. The case was ultimately dismissed when the primary witness (the police officer) did not appear in court.
—
Cambridge District Court
OUI-1st Offense
Result: OUI-1st Offense, Not Guilty
Description: Client, a 27-year-old man, was pulled over on Mass. Ave. in Arlington for speeding; he was traveling 55 in a 30mph zone. When asked by the officer, he admitted to drinking two beers while he was out with some friends. The officer noticed the standard signs of alcohol impairment — strong odor of alcoholic beverage, slurred speech, bloodshot/glassy eyes, unsteadiness on his feet.
Client was found not guilty at a jury trial.
2011
November 2011
Charges: OUI-1st Offense (Breath Test, .06%), OUI-Drugs
Court: Haverhill District Court
Result: Dismissed, both counts; Immediate Threat removed
Description: Client, a 21-year-old female Iraq-War veteran, who suffered a traumatic brain injury, was stopped after weaving across all lanes on 495. The officer detected the slight odor of alcohol coming from her. Two other officers arrived on the scene. She told the officers that she had been experiencing “flashbacks.” She spoke clearly, her eyes were not red, and she was well-balanced. She told the officers that she had consumed 2 beers earlier in the evening and that she had taken her medication earlier in the day. She asked the officers to give her a breath test, because she “knew” that she was not impaired. Back at the station she provided a breath sample, the results were .06%.
Just prior to trial, the Commonwealth decided not to go forward. Attorney Fasoldt moved to dismiss for lack of prosecution. The judge allowed the motion and dismissed both charges.
In addition, following her arrest, her license was immediately revoked as an “Immediate Threat.” Within two weeks of the revocation, Attorney Fasoldt was successful in having her license reinstated.
—
August 2011
Charges: OUI-1st Offense (Breath Test, .08%), Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Court: Attleboro District Court
Result: Jury Trial – Not Guilty on both counts
Description: Client, a 27-year-old man, was stopped after driving through a stop sign. He had just dropped off his pregnant wife at their home, and was now driving home their friends. Client showed standard signs of impairment — slurred speech, red/bloodshot eyes, strong odor of alcohol. He admitted to the officer that he’d consumed a “couple of beers.” He was asked to get out of the car and walk to the sidewalk. He performed 4 Field Sobriety Tests, all of which he failed in the opinion of the officer. He was arrested and brought back to the station. He consented to a breath test, the results of which were .08%.
At trial, I called an Expert Witness who testified about how the machine’s reading may not have been accurate. Additionally, Client’s wife testified about his normal behavior before he drove her home. Judge allowed Motion for Required Finding of Not Guilty on the Negligent Operation charge. The Jury found him Not Guilty on the OUI.
—
Charges: OUI, First Offense
Court: Dedham District Court
Result: Jury Trial – Not Guilty
Description: Client, a 43-year-old female, was stopped after her tires crossed the marked lanes 3 times. She showed the standard signs of alcohol impairment: slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, odor of alcohol, and unsteadiness on her feet. A booking video showed Client being polite and cooperative and having good balance.
A jury found her not guilty of the OUI charge.
—
Charges: Possession of Class B (Cocaine)
Court: Fitchburg District Court
Result: Dismissed
Description: Client, a 31-year-old male, was a passenger in a car in a parking lot. Police approached the car, detected the odor of marijuana, and asked Client to get out of the car. Once outside, client was searched. Police found a small amount of cocaine in his pocket and was charged with possession of a Class B substance.
I filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging the search. The ADA agreed to dismiss the case, as it was likely that the cocaine was going to be suppressed.
—
Charges: OUI-2nd Offense, Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Court: Wareham District Court
Result: Not Guilty on both counts
Description: Client, a 41-year-old man, had an accident at 4:30am in which he struck in a snow bank and he became stuck. A concerned citizen witness called police. Moments later, the police arrived. Client’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy, his speech was slurred, he was unsteady on his feet, and he smelled strongly of alcohol.
The arresting officer stated that client was “extremely intoxicated.” Back at the station, client became upset and began crying. He told officers that his wife had just left him and he had lost his job. At trial, two officers testified along with one civilian witness. The testimony was not nearly as harmful as the initial report suggested.
Client was found not guilty after a bench trial, and the judge reinstated his license.
—
Charges: Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle
Court: East Brookfield District Court
Result: No Complaint Issued, No Charge Filed After Clerk Magistrate Hearing
Description:
Client, a 38-year-old man, was pulled over after swerving “all over the road…going into the other lane…and crossing the marked lanes about 12 times.” In addition, his two children were in the back seat. The Court issued a summons for client to appear before a clerk-magistrate for a hearing to determine whether he should be charged with the crime of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle.
After the hearing, the clerk decided not to issue the complaint; he was not actually charged with the crime.
April 2011
Charges: Threatening
Court: Dedham District Court
Result: Charges Dismissed
Description: Our client a 55 year old man was charged with making hostile threats to employees at the hospital his daughter was admitted to.
RESULT: At our clients clerk magistrates hearing Attorney Matson was able to get the case dismissed
—
Charges: OUI-2nd Offense, Neg. Op., Assault and Battery on Police Officer, Resisting Arrest
Court: Fall River District Court
Result: OUI-2nd Offense – Not Guilty, Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle – Not Guilty; ABPO and Resisting Arrest — Guilty
Description: Client, a 43-year old woman, was stopped twice within 5 minutes because her car matched the description of one that had just left a bar where a person was creating a disturbance. My client was that person. She showed few signs of intoxication, but she lashed out at the police violently; she kicked one officer in the groin, she called another officer vulgar names, and she tried to kick out the window of the cruiser. A booking video showed client’s agitated behavior.
Despite her awful antics, she was acquitted of OUI-2nd and Negligent Driving. Judge reinstated client’s license after trial. Full disclosure: client was convicted of Assault and Battery on a Police Officer and Resisting Arrest.
—
Charge: OUI
Court: Westfield District Court
Result: Dismissed
Description: Client, a 34-year-old male, was pulled over in the Town of Southwick for weaving and crossing over the marked lanes. Client’s driving was otherwise good; no speeding, stopped at stop signs, used turn signal, etc. The officer followed him for 2 miles before deciding to pull him over. Client displayed usual signs of impairment (slurred speech, red eyes, odor of alcohol). A friend in the front passenger seat was visibly intoxicated. Client admitted to consuming one beer prior to driving.
He told the officer that he was driving his friend home from the bar because his friend was getting into fights. Client did well on the 4 field sobriety tests (Alphabet Test, 9-step walk and turn, One Leg Stand, and Finger-to-Nose). In addition, a booking video showed client acting normally.
At trial, the ADA agreed to dismiss the OUI if the client would agree to a CWOF the Negligent Operation charge. Client agreed.
—
Charge: Leaving the Scene
Court: Woburn District Court
Result: Pretrial Probation–dismissed after 6 months
Description: Client, a 37-year-old man, was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident after backing into a car in a parking lot and driving away. The driver of the other car called the police. The damage to the other car was minimal. This occurred during a snowstorm; client maintained that he thought he backed into a snowbank. After explaining everything, the prosecutor agreed to place client on pretrial probation for 6 months, with $300 in court fees. As long as client pays the fees and does not get arrested the case will be dismissed.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense
Court: Palmer District Court
Result: OUI-1st Offense, Dismissed
Client, a 65-year-old woman, was pulled over for driving without her headlights. She spoke with slurred speech, was slow and lethargic, had a slight odor of alcohol coming from her breath. When she stepped from the car she was unsteady on her feet. The client admitted to drinking 1 glass of wine 5 hours earlier. The officer took this to mean that client was impaired by alcohol. As it happened, client is a diabetic who had suffered severe head trauma 2 years ago when she fell at home. Due to the accident, her speech was permanently affected, as was her short-term memory and balance. The officer assumed that she was impaired by alcohol, when in fact she was impaired by her everyday medical condition.
The commonwealth recognized that client was not impaired by alcohol, so they decided to dismiss the charge.
—
Charge OUI-3rd Offense, OUI Drugs
Court: Haverhill District Court
Result: Third Offense OUI Alcohol Charge reduced to 2nd offense, no jail; OUI-drugs, dismissed
Client, a 39-year-old man with severe alcoholism who had served time in jail previously, was stopped in a parking lot in Haverhill after almost side-swiping several cars on the road. Just prior to that, he was seen by several civilians swerving all over the road. After being taken out of the vehicle he was barely able to stand. Seeing that it was a medical emergency, client was taken to hospital. His blood was drawn, the results of which showed that his blood alcohol level was 0.41. In many cases, people die when their blood alcohol level is that high. A search of client’s car yielded 4 empty pints of vodka. Client was also charged with OUI-drugs after police believed that he had taken some prescription medicine along with the alcohol.
Initially, the Commonwealth insisted on seeking a lengthy jail sentence. Their case on the OUI was strong. Fortunately for client, the prior offenses were weak. On the date we were to select a trial, the Commonwealth agreed to reduce the charge to a second offense.
—
Charge: OUI-2nd Offense
Court: BMC Central
Result: Case Dismissed
Client, a 43-year-old male, was charged with OUI in 1989. Client was stopped on the Central Artery by the Metro District Police. Client subsequently moved out of state to because of a job. Unfortunately, he did so without resolving his OUI case. A warrant was issued. Twenty-two years later Client was unable to renew his license due to the Massachusetts warrant.
Client hired Attorney Fasoldt to represent him. Several times before client flew back east, Attorney Fasoldt reached out to the Commonwealth in an effort to determine what evidence still existed. The reason for contacting the DA’s office so many times was to ensure that client only had to return to Boston one time. Interestingly, neither the roadway nor the police department is still in existence; the roadway was torn down and moved underground during the Big Dig, and the Metro Police merged with the State Police. As it happened, the arresting officer was still employed by the State Police, but he had no independent recollection of the event. In addition, there was no police report.
In June, 2011 Client returned to Massachusetts to answer to the warrant and the 22-year-old OUI charge. The case was Nol Pross’d which is similar to a dismissal, in that the Commonwealth states that they will not prosecute the case.
—
Charge: Leaving the Scene of Property Damage
Court: BMC Central District Court
Result: Pre-trial Probation with no fees or fines
Client, a 40-year-old woman, was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident with Property Damage in Boston after she allegedly crashed her motor vehicle into 2 parked cars and drove away. A witness called the police. She was located a few blocks from the scene of the accident. She admitted to crashing into the cars and fleeing. She told the police that she was scared, and in a panic, she decided to flee. Both parked cars sustained serious damage; one was totaled. The client’s car was totaled as well.
Client’s insurance company paid the claims to the people whose cars were damaged. The judge agreed to place the client on pretrial probation for 1 year with no fees or fines after Attorney Fasoldt explained that although she worked full time, the client was a single mother of 3 children. Pretrial probation was a favorable outcome as it does not require an admission to any facts in court. If the client stays out of trouble for 1 year the case will be dismissed outright.
—
Charge: Assault and Battery
Court: Malden District Court
Result: Assault and Battery Dismissed.
Client, a 44-year-old woman, was charged with assault and battery, after having a physical fight with her ex-fiance in a parking lot in Malden. The police witnessed her punching and scratching the victim in the face.
The case was dismissed pursuant to an “Accord and Satisfaction;” the victim indicated that his injuries were “satisfied” by the client. The court accepted the accord and satisfaction and the case was dismissed.
—
Charges: OUI, 4th Offense, Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Court: BMC Central (Boston Municipal District Court)
Result: OUI-4th Offense, Not Guilty; Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, Not Guilty.
Client, a 33 year old man, was arrested on New Year’s Eve 2010 in Boston. He was driving the wrong way down Lansdowne Street, a one-way street. He turned the car around and sped away. As he drove, two Boston Police Officers said that they had to jump out of the way to avoid being hit. When the car stopped the Client was forcefully removed and thrown to the ground. He was placed in handcuffs and taken to the police station. The police alleged that Client smelled strongly of alcohol and that he exhibited the standard signs of alcohol impairment: slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, unsteady on feet. In addition, Client was belligerent and uncooperative. Client was not offered any field sobriety tests. Back at the station, client told police that he had been at 4 other bars. He refused a breath test. The police, however, never asked client any questions about his alcohol consumption or any questions about what he was doing that day.
At trial, the testimony of the officers differed significantly from their original written report. It would seem that that jury was skeptical of their testimony because they found Client Not Guilty of both counts, OUI (multiple offense) and Assault with Dangerous Weapon. If convicted, Client could have been sentenced to up to 5 years in jail.
—
Charges: OU I- 1st Offense, Operating After Suspension
Court: Cambridge District Court
Result: OUI-1st Offense, Dismissed; Operation after Suspension, Dismissed.
Client, a 27-year-old man, was charged with OUI and Operating with a Suspended License (OAS), after being pulled over on Memorial Drive in Cambridge. He was stopped because a trooper’s check on client’s license plate indicated that the owner of the vehicle had a revoked license. Client drove perfectly, he committed no traffic violations.
Client’s girlfriend was passed out in the passenger seat. As Client was speaking to the trooper, the girlfriend vomited. Client was taken out of the car. At roadside he performed the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests fairly well. Nevertheless, he was arrested and charged with OUI and OAS.
—
Charge: Indecent Exposure
Court: Waltham District Court
Result: Indecent Exposure, Dismissed.
Client, a 27-year-old man, was arrested for urinating in public. At the time, he was in probation for an OUI. Client was charged with indecent exposure, because his genitals were exposed to the public as he urinated. He was also charged with a probation violation. After agreeing to pay a fine, the Commonwealth agreed to dismiss the case. In addition, Client stipulated that he violated his probation. Probation was terminated and his case was dismissed. This outcome was particularly important for Client because of complicated Immigration proceedings.
—
Charge: Assault and Battery
Court: Cambridge Juvenile Court
Result: Assault and Battery, Dismissed.
Client, a 15-year-old girl, was charged with Assault and Battery after a family dispute became physical. Specifically, it was alleged that she pushed her mother as her mother tried to intervene in a fight between the Client and Client’s aunt.
Client’ mother had no interest in testifying against her daughter. Consequently, we drafted an “Accord and Satisfaction” whereby the mother agreed that her daughter had satisfied her for the injury caused. The Court accepted the accord and satisfaction and the case was dismissed.
—
2010
Charge: Operating on a Suspended License (after OUI)
Court: Barnstable District Court
Result: Amended to OAS, no jail time.
Client, a 33-year-old male, was stopped in Yarmouth for speeding. He was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Suspended License following an OUI (OAS—OUI). A conviction of this charge carries a mandatory 60-day jail sentence. Client’s license was suspended for OUI and his license suspension period had passed but he was unable to pay the reinstatement fee because of an outstanding warrant (the summons was sent to the incorrect address). Although the Commonwealth could have pushed for a conviction, Attorney Fasoldt convinced them to amend the charge to a simple OAS. Client did not have to serve any jail time.
—
Charge: Operating on a Suspended License (after OUI)
Court: Ayer District Court
Result: Dismissed, no jail time
Client, a 48-year-old male, was stopped in Ayer. He was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Suspended License following an OUI (OAS—OUI). A conviction of this charge carries a mandatory 60-day jail sentence. Client’s license was suspended for something other than an OUI conviction, yet the police charged him with the crime that mandates 60 days in jail.
Attorney Fasoldt convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss the charge in exchange for court costs. Client did not have to serve any jail time. Case Dismissed.
—
Charge: Operating on a Suspended License (after OUI)
Court: Greenfield District Court
Result: Dismissed, no jail time
Client, a 21-year-old male, was stopped in Gill for speeding. He was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Suspended License following an OUI (OAS—OUI). A conviction of this charge carries a mandatory 60-day jail sentence. Client’s license was suspended for something other than an OUI conviction, yet the police charged him with the crime that mandates 60 days in jail.
Attorney Fasoldt convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss the charge in exchange for court costs. Client did not have to serve any jail time.
—
Charge: Assault and Battery Dangerous Weapon, Assault and Battery
Court: Ayer District Court
Result: Assault and Battery Dangerous Weapon, Assault and Battery, All Charges Dismissed
Client, a 41-year-old male, was charged with Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon (ABDW) and Assault and Battery (A&B) after a violent alcohol-fueled confrontation with his wife at their home. She accused him of pushing her off the bed and slamming her leg in the door. After several court dates and many meeting and discussions with Client and wife, wife decided that she did not want to testify, thereby invoking her marital privilege (the right not to be forced to testify against your spouse). The case was dismissed.
—
Charge: Operating on a Suspended License (after OUI)
Court: Dudley District Court
Result: Amended to OAS, no jail time
Client, a 31-year-old male, was stopped by State Police on I-84. He was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Suspended License following an OUI (OAS—OUI). A conviction of this charge carries a mandatory 60-day jail sentence. Client’s license was suspended for something other than an OUI conviction, yet the State Police charged him with the crime that mandates 60 days in jail.
Attorney Fasoldt convinced the Commonwealth to amend the charge to a simple OAS, which does not carry a mandatory jail sentence.
—
Charge: Unarmed Robbery
Court: Cambridge Juvenile Court
Result: Case Dismissed
Client, a 16-year-old boy, was charged with Unarmed Robbery following an incident in Somerville where pizza delivery man was beaten and robbed of pizzas and cash by four young males. Client was arrested two weeks after the incident. The investigation that led to his arrest involved two confidential informants who told police that Client was seen eating the pizza the night of the incident. In addition, Client met the driver’s description of one of the robbers. A photographic identification lineup was done, and the driver selected Client as a perpetrator.
Attorney Fasoldt attempted to obtain the photographs and other evidence used in the photo ID procedure, but the Commonwealth was unable to provide it. Several attempts were made, but it was never turned over. The case was eventually dismissed due to a failure to provide discovery.
—
Charge: Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle
Court: Cambridge District Court
Result: Charge Dismissed
Client, a 65-year-old man, was charged with Receiving a Stolen Motor Vehicle following a traffic stop in Cambridge. Client was seated in the right rear passenger seat when the vehicle was stopped on Memorial Drive. The driver, Client’s nephew, was told by police that the car was stolen. The police arrested everyone in the vehicle and charged them with receiving a stolen motor vehicle.
The assistant district attorney agreed with Attorney Fasoldt to dismiss the case. Case Dismissed.
—
Charge: Larceny of a Motor Vehicle
Court: Boston Juvenile Court
Result: Dismissed
Client, a 15-year-old boy, was charged with Larceny of a Motor Vehicle in juvenile court following an incident in Boston. Client and a friend were sitting in a parked car behind their apartment building; client was in passenger seat. Police arrived after receiving a call that two teenage males were breaking into a car. The car had been stolen. Police arrested Client without asking him what he was doing in the car or even if he knew it was stolen.
Attorney Fasoldt filed a Motion to Dismiss based on a lack of probable cause to issue the complaint; the argument was that Client should not have been charged in the first place as there was not enough evidence. The judge agreed. Motion to Dismiss was allowed. Case dismissed.
—
Charge: Assault and Battery, Reckless Endangerment of Child
Court: Cambridge Juvenile Court
Result: Pretrial Probation then Dismissed, avoids conviction and admission on record
Client, a 14-year-old boy, was charged with assault and battery and reckless endangerment of a child following an incident in Cambridge. Case heard in juvenile court. Client was babysitting his 7-year-old nephew. They were roughhousing when a neighbor called the police and said that Client was trying to push the 7-year-old out the window. When police arrived, the 7-year-old told police that he and Client were playing “cops and robbers” and that his cousin scared him when he pretended to push him out the window. Client had a clean record.
He was given 6 months of Pretrial Probation. If he completes the probation without incident, the case will be dismissed. No conviction or admission will appear on his record.
—
Charge: Distribution of Heroin in a School Zone
Court: Lynn District Court
Result: Case Dismissed
Client, a 60-year-old man, was arrested and charged with distributing Heroin within 1000 feet of a school in Lynn. A conviction of a school zone drug charge carries a mandatory 2-year jail sentence. His arrest happened after a woman in his apartment building died of a drug overdose. The apartment building was located within 1000 feet of an elementary school. Friends of the deceased woman, who were also found to be using heroin, told police that Client had sold them the heroin. Both Commonwealth witnesses had lengthy criminal records. When confronted and searched, Client denied selling the heroin and no drugs were found on him. The case was dismissed.
OUI Charges
Court: West Roxbury Division of BMC
Charge: OUI-2nd Offense
Result: Dismissed
Client, a 33-year-old man, was charged with OUI-2nd Offense following a single-car accident in West Roxbury. Client was about a mile away from accident scene when he was found by police. He was arrested on the spot, the police assuming that he had been the driver of the truck. There were no eyewitnesses to the accident. He was not offered any field sobriety tests, and he refused a breath test. Client was given a 3-year license suspension for refusing the breath test.
On the trial date, the Commonwealth moved to dismiss the OUI charge due to a lack of evidence. Case Dismissed. After the dismissal Attorney Fasoldt’s Motion to Reinstate the Defendant’s License was allowed by the judge. Client’s was given his license back.
—
Charges: OUI Drugs (Marjuana) OUI Liquor-1st Offense
Court: Brockton District Court
Result: OUI Drugs, Dismissed; OUI Liquor-1st Offense, Not Guilty
Client, a 19-year old man from Brockton, was pulled over after the police noticed his car swerving and failing to use his turn signal. Client stopped his car in the middle of the street. The officer smelled the strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from him. He also noticed that Client’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy, and his speech was slurred. In addition to Client, there were two passengers in the car, both 21-year-old females. Client was asked to get out of the car; when he did so he was unsteady on his feet. He was given three field sobriety tests, all of which he failed. The car was searched and marijuana was found. Back at the station he told the officers, “come on man, can’t you give me a break. I’m on probation.” He refused the breath test. He charged with OUI-liquor 1st Offense and OUI-Drugs.
Prior to trial the OUI-Drugs charge was dismissed as the Commonwealth agreed with Attorney Fasoldt that he should not have been charged with it in the first place. At a jury trial, Attorney Fasoldt showed the jury that his Client could not use his right arm to steer or to shift gears (the car he was driving had a standard transmission), because his Client had just recently separated his right shoulder in a car accident. Instead, he was using his left arm to shift gears while steering with his knee. This accounted for the poor driving. It also came to light that Client was a designated driver for the girls and had picked them up at a party just before being stopped. This accounted for the strong odor of alcohol. In addition, the Brockton police never asked the Client if he had been drinking; he simply assumed that he had been. Also, the officer never asked Client if he had any medical issues that would affect his balance or coordination. This demonstrated to the jury that the officer had not conducted a thorough investigation. Lastly, Attorney Fasoldt showed the jury that the officer had not administered the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests in the correct manner, thus invalidating their effectiveness for detecting alcohol impairment.
The jury decided that the Commonwealth had not met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and found my Client Not Guilty.
—
Charge: OUI Drugs (Marijuana)
Court: Lawrence District Court
Result: OUI Drugs, Not Guilty
Client, a 60-year-old man, was driving his vehicle on his lunch break when he was followed by the Andover Police. A special unit Andover Police had been conducting surveillance on his co-workers due to a rumor that the co-workers were selling drugs at work. The Client was followed for 15 minutes through the streets of Andover. The Client did not commit a single traffic violation. He drove perfectly; no speeding, no swerving, and stopping completely at each stop signal. Nevertheless, he was pulled over. The Officer said that he pulled over the car because he could smell marijuana coming from Client’s vehicle and because he could see the occupants passing around a marijuana cigarette. Client’s eyes were red and bloodshot, and his reaction time was slow. The Client was given several field sobriety tests, all of which he failed. The officer was a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE). DREs are supposed to conduct a drug evaluation at the station. However, in this case the officer conducted a similar type evaluation at the scene. He was charged with OUI-Drugs.
Before trial Attorney Fasoldt convinced the judge to limit what the officer could testify to regarding the roadside drug evaluation. Attorney Fasoldt showed that the officer never actually saw Client put the joint to his mouth. The jury found Client guilty, but immediately following the jury’s verdict Attorney Fasoldt renewed his Motion for a Required Finding of Not Guilty and asked the judge to find Client Not Guilty. The Judge agreed with Attorney Fasoldt; he set aside the jury’s verdict and imposed a finding of Not Guilty.
—
Court: Central Division of Boston Municipal Court (BMC)
Charge: OUI-1st Offense
Result: Not Guilty, License Reinstated
Client, a 27-year-old male, was sitting in the passenger seat of his friend’s car. The car was stopped at the exit of a parking garage in downtown Boston. His friend had just left the vehicle to obtain cash from an ATM so as to be able to pay the parking fee. The keys were in the ignition and the car was running. Moments before, Client had tripped and fallen on the cobblestones. His hands were in his pockets and he was unable to brace himself when he fell. He broke three teeth. Later, Client went to the hospital where it was determined that he had a broken nose, broken jaw, and concussion. As he sat in the passenger seat, he was bleeding badly from the face. A security guard from the garage and the man in the payment booth saw Client’s bloodied face and tried to hand Client tissues to wipe the blood. Client was unable to reach the tissues from the passenger seat so he moved over to the driver’s seat. As he sat in the driver’s seat and wiped his face of blood, a police officer, who was working road detail nearby, came over and told the Client to get out of the car. The Client was dazed and unable to stand up straight. He failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested. He refused a breath test. Meanwhile, his friend had returned. His friend tried to explain to the officer what had happened. The officer told the friend to “shut up” or else he would be arrested too. Attorney Fasoldt tracked down the garage employees. They told Attorney Fasoldt the same story—the Client was just moved into the driver’s seat to get the tissues so he could wipe his face.
At a bench trial, the friend and the garage employees testified to what they saw. The judge found the Client Not Guilty. Client’s license was reinstated.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense, .09 Breath Test
Court: Dorchester Division of BMC,
Result: Not Guilty
On his way home from dinner with his girlfriend, Client, a 31-year-old male, was stopped at a Sobriety Checkpoint on Gallivan Boulevard in Dorchester. The initial screening officer smelled the odor of alcohol coming from the car, he also noticed that Client’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy and that his speech was slurred. He asked Client to say the alphabet. Client did not say alphabet correctly, and was told to drive to a secondary screening area, known as “the pit.” At the pit Client was told to get out of the car. As he did so, he braced himself on the door and was unsteady on his feet. He was given field sobriety tests, all of which he failed. He was arrested, and brought to the BATMOBILE (an on-site trailer where chemical breath tests are administered.) Client agreed to take a breath test, he blew a .09%.
The breath test was excluded prior to trial. At trial, attorney Fasoldt’s cross examination of the witnesses revealed innocent explanations for Client’s seemingly drunk behavior. The jury agreed and Client was found Not Guilty.
—
Charge: OUI-2nd Offense
Court: Woburn District Court
Result: Not Guilty
Client, a 45-year-old man, caused a serious 3-car accident on the Middlesex Turnpike in Burlington. Two people were taken to the hospital and treated for injuries. He had been driving his wife’s car. Before police arrived he was seen taking a small bottle of alcohol from the glove compartment of the car and placing it in an adjacent parking lot. When the police and ambulances arrived Client was seated behind the wheel looking dazed. When asked what happened, Client said, “the car in front of me just stopped.” Smelling the strong odor of an alcoholic beverage and noticing Client’s slurred speech the officer told him to get out of the car. Client was unsteady on his feet. He was unable to perform the field sobriety tests. He was arrested and taken to the station. At the station Client was unable to provide a valid breath sample, due to him being severely asthmatic. The officers never asked Client if he was injured or if he had any medical conditions. As it turned out, Client was an obese diabetic who had earlier that day suffered a diabetic episode. Attorney Fasoldt obtained Client’s medical records to verify Client’s medical history, and had them summonsed to court.
At trial, Attorney Fasoldt poked holes in the Commonwealth’s theory that the accident was caused by Client’s alcohol impairment. In an unusual twist, Client took the stand. To properly prepare Client to testify, we put him through several mock direct and cross-examinations, and a simulated trial, where Attorney Fasoldt played the defense attorney and another attorney played the role of the prosecutor. These exercises ensured that Client would be fully prepared when he took the stand at the real trial. At trial, Client told the jury what he had done that day and how he had just experienced a low-blood-sugar episode. In addition, he explained that he found the bottle in the glove box when he was looking for the registration. He panicked and decided that he should get rid of the bottle. Client’s slurred speech was explained by his thick Caribbean accent. The arresting officer testified that, in his experience, a diabetic smells like alcohol and appears dazed and confused during an episode. Ironically, Attorney Fasoldt objected to Officer’s testimony on grounds that he is not medically qualified to testify about diabetes, but the officer’s testimony was helpful to Client’s case. Client’s testimony was earnest and effective, the diabetes defense was successful, the jury found Client Not Guilty.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense
Court: Dorchester Division of BMC
Result: Case Dismissed
Client, a 27-year-old male, did not stop for the troopers as he approached a sobriety checkpoint on Gallivan Boulevard in Dorchester. According to the troopers, it took several attempts to get him to finally pull his vehicle over. Based on the trooper’s observations that Client had bloodshot eyes and the strong odor of alcohol, Client was directed to a secondary screening area. As he drove to this area he made an “exaggerated wide turn.”
He was ordered to get out of the car and when he did he was unsteady on his feet. He failed all the field sobriety tests. After he was arrested he became belligerent, aggressive, and uncooperative. Because of his belligerence and lack of cooperation, it was decided that Client should testify in order to explain his poor behavior.
Client, to his defense, didn’t stop right away because he thought that the troopers were telling him to switch lanes, as he had just pulled out of the Walgreen’s parking lot and into the line of cars. In addition, he has a bad ankle, which explains the unsteadiness. Also, he became agitated when the Trooper refused to explain the field sobriety test again. In his mind, he was being rushed and bullied, as he was surrounded by 3 intimidating State Troopers.
To properly prepare Client to testify, we put him through several mock direct and cross-examinations, and a simulated trial, where Attorney Fasoldt played the defense attorney and another attorney played the role of the prosecutor. These exercises ensured that Client would be fully prepared when he took the stand at the real trial.
The case was ultimately dismissed, without the need for the defendant to testify.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense
Court: Worcester District Court
Result: Charges Dismissed
Client, a 43-year-old male, was charged with OUI in 1990. Client had been in a 2-car accident where he rear-ended a car in front of him. The Worcester police officer observed Client’s car stopped between lanes with front end damage. Client appeared very unsteady on his feet, swayed back and forth nearly falling, and his speech was difficult to understand. When asked if he had anything to drink, Client replied he had 3-5 beers. Client failed all field sobriety tests. He refused a breath test. Client then moved out of state without resolving OUI case, a warrant was issued. Twenty years later Client was unable to renew his license due to the Massachusetts warrant.
Client hired Attorney Fasoldt to represent him. In July, 2010 Client returned to Massachusetts to answer to the warrant and the 19-year-old OUI charge. The case was dismissed.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense
Court: Plymouth District Court
Result: Dismissed
Client, a 55-year-old male, was charged with an OUI in 1987. He left Massachusetts following his arraignment. A warrant was issued. Client was unable to renew his license in 2010 because of the outstanding warrant from Massachusetts.
Client hired Attorney Fasoldt to represent him. In November, 2010 Client returned to Massachusetts to answer to the warrant and the 23-year-old OUI charge. The case was dismissed.
—
Charge: OUI Drugs
Court: Worcester District Court
Result: Motion to Suppress Evidence Allowed, Dismissed
Client, a 50-year-old female, was stopped on Route 290 West at 11:30pm. The trooper said that she was swerving. When he approached the car, Client seemed nervous and jittery. She also spoke about random subjects without being asked. In the front passenger seat the trooper noticed “cut straws and tinfoil,” which he thought was consistent with drug use. He made Client get out of the car while he searched it. During the search he recovered two bags of cocaine. Also, a prescription bottle of Oxycontin pills was recovered in her purse. She admitted to having taken her prescription earlier in the day. Client was arrested for OUI-drugs and possession of cocaine. On the way back to the barracks Client was asked about her drug use that evening. She told the trooper that she had used some cocaine about two hours earlier and that she had purchased it in Fitchburg. However, when she was questioned she had not been read her Miranda rights.
At the barracks, Client was given a lengthy Drug Recognition Evaluation by a Drug Recognition Expert. The DRE determined that Client was under the influence of a Narcotic Analgesic (Oxycontin). Whenever a DRE is done on a person the evaluator must prepare a report of the evaluation. In this case, the evaluation was not provided. In fact, Attorney Fasoldt requested it 3 times. After the third request, Attorney Fasoldt moved to have the DRE evaluation suppressed based on lack of compliance by the Commonwealth. The judge agreed and he suppressed the DRE evaluation.
In addition, Attorney Fasoldt filed a Motion to Suppress the statements, arguing that they should be suppressed because they were obtained unconstitutionally when she was “expressly questioned without having been read her Miranda rights.” The judge agreed and suppressed the statements. Not having enough evidence to go forward to trial, the Commonwealth moved to dismiss the OUI-drugs charge, which the court granted.
—
Charge: OUI-1st Offense, Breath Test .10
Court: Westborough District Court
Result: Not Guilty
Client, a 40-year-old female, was stopped at a sobriety checkpoint in Shrewsbury. The initial screening Trooper detected a slight odor of an alcoholic beverage and slurred speech. Client admitted to consuming 1 pint of beer. Client was directed to go to secondary screening area. At the secondary area, the trooper detected a slight odor of alcohol. He told Client to get out of the car. Client was wearing high-heel shoes. She completed the field sobriety tests without making a single error. She was arrested anyway. In the BATMOBILE (on-site trailer where chemical breath tests are administered) she was given a breath test. She blew a .10.
Prior to trial the breath test was excluded. At a bench trial, Attorney Fasoldt highlighted that Client’s behavior was consistent with sobriety. The trooper even admitted that he did not want to arrest her. Client was found Not Guilty
