2022 Case Summaries
December 2, 2022
Newton District Court
2112 CR 532
Client, 53-year old male with a history of mental issues is alleged to have exposed himself by ‘mooning’ a group of teenagers ‘he believed were talking about him’. The police are summoned, Client arrested and ‘overly charged’ with Indecent Exposure. The Court requests that Atty. Kelly be appointed to handle the case. Atty. Kelly immediately enlists a Forensic Psychologist to examine the Client to determine whether he had the sufficient mental ability to appreciate the significance of his actions. The bottom is no he did not. As such this information was presented to the Judge and the Prosecutor who both agreed the case should be DISMISSED.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED
November 7, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2251CR 264
Client, 33-year old Mother of 3 children, estranged from the Father is charged with A&B with a Dangerous Weapon, B&E with intent to Commit a Felony, 2 counts of A&B. These allegations were made by the alleged victim ‘new girlfriend of Father’. The alleged assault and B&E were not witnessed by anyone. The new GF called the police, they believed her story – Client arrested and waited 8 months to prove her innocense. She eventually hired Attorney Kelly. On this day ( based on a series of factors that pointed to the Client’s innocense ) the case was DISMISSED upon Atty. Kelly’s request.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED: (2) FELONY CONVICTIONS AVOIDED AMONG OTHER CHARGES.
October 12, 2022
Newton District Court
No. 2112 CR 587
Client, 29-year old male who performs professionally as a ‘Drag Queen artist’ is arrested for negligent operation of a MV and OUI. On a night in December, 2021 , the Client had finished performing his ‘2nd and last show’ of the evening and settled in at the bar still in full costume to have a alcoholic drink before leaving for home. In actuality he consumed 2 vodka and Red Bull cocktails with friends and then left. On his way, for no apparent reason he lost control of his MV and hit a parked car. Police arrive, smell alcohol and eventually conclude ‘he was under the influence of alcohol’ and he is arrested. Atty. Kelly explores the possibility that his Client’s drink was laced with a ‘roofie’. In the Boston area for the last 3 years, there has been a high incidence of patrons’s drinks at local bars being ‘laced or tampered with drugs’. The Client explains that this is what must have happened to him. Atty. Kelly attempts to persuade the prosecutor prior to trial that this is what must have occurred. Atty. Kelly offers proof of alcohol consumption and the fact this has happened before at the very same club. The prosecutor is not convinced. On this day of trial, after all the evidence is put forth, including the testimony of police and the Client, the Judge IS convinced and acquits the Client of all charges. NOT GUILTY TO ALL CHARGES after Bench Trial.
RESULT: NOT GUILTY ALL CHARGES.
August 15, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2151 CR 1013
Client, 31-year old male is charged with A&B on his girlfriend. A 911 call is made, police arrive and interview the alleged victim who is screaming about the fact that the Client has the key to her car. The police inquire of the Client who says the ‘key’ is in the living room where it is found. The alleged victim continues to scream and escalates the situation and claims the Client ‘hit’ her. No evidence of a struggle or marks upon the alleged victim are present or apparent. The Client denies ever striking her. Nevertheless he is arrested, arraigned in Court, and after several months, the case is set for trial. On this date, to no ones surprise, the alleged victim fails to attend court. As such, case DISMISSED for failure to prosecute.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.
July 21, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2251 CR 212
Client, 41-year old male is charged with Domestic A&B upon his wife. Wife makes a 911 call – reports husband hit her during a verbal argument. Police interview Client and he denies ever hitting her, no marks or bruises. He of course is arrested based on her statement. Atty. Kelly is retained and informs ‘wife’ she should consider hiring legal counsel. She eventually does and informs the Court that ‘she recants what she said to the police’ and wishes to assert her ‘marital privilege’ ( to not testify against her husband ). Court accepts her ‘assertion’ – however the prosecutor intends to offer her statements to the 911 call dispatcher. Both parties file Motion(s) – Atty. Kelly’s Motion is successful in preventing the prosecutor from offering her ‘statements’ at trial. As a result, case DISMISSED.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.
May 16, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2251 CR 219
Client, 75-year old male was charged with violating a restraining order that prevented him from contacting or visiting his wife. Unfortunately the arresting police officers did not take into account the severe dementia that the Client has been suffering with. He was arrested and placed in jail and later transported to a local hospital. Atty. Kelly is appointed by the Court and immediately hires a doctor to examine him relative to the issue of ‘criminal responsibility’ (Question: was he able to conform his conduct in accordance with the law or unable to do so because of mental defect or disease?). The doctor opines that he was not ( at the time of the incident ) and will likely never be able to. Case DISMISSED by the Court upon Motion by Atty. Kelly pursuant to the ‘interests of justice’ MGL c. 123, §16(f).
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED
May 4, 2022
Concord District Court
Clerk’s Hearing
No. 2247 AC 308
Client, 27-year old male, no prior criminal record is alleged to have assaulted and battered a patron at a local bar over a young woman who both have dated. Atty. Kelly is retained, employs an investigator who under covers several witnesses who dispute the ‘alleged victims’ account of the incident. The Clerk Magistrate holds a hearing this day to determine whether criminal charges should issue against the Client. The Magistrate finds no probable cause to issue a criminal complaint against the Client BUT in a follow up separate Application for Complaint Issuance hearing FINDS probable cause to issue an assault and battery charged against the so called ‘victim’!
RESULT: APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL COMPLAINT DENIED
May 2, 2022
Newton District Court
No. 2112 CR 536
Client, 55-year old male and a general manager of a local grocery store. It is alleged that his MV was involved in an accident and left the scene after causing damage to another MV. The police investigate and question the Client who admits to the accident and claims he had fallen asleep. After the collision, he apparently panicked and left the area. He was summoned to Court and Atty. Kelly persuades the Prosecutor to allow the Client to attend an 8 hr. National Safety Driver Course in lieu of pursuing the criminal charge. Case DISMISSED – otherwise ‘clean criminal record’ preserved.
RESULT: CRIMINAL CHARGED DISMISSED.
April 20, 2022
Dedham District Court
No. 2154 CR 72
Client, 29-year old male is charged with OUI Alcohol after allegedly weaving between and over the marked lanes of travel at 2 am. The police stop his MV he asked to step from his MV – agrees to perform ‘Field Sobriety Evaluations’ [ never a good idea ]. The police claim he failed each assessment, smells of alcohol, glassy eyes and is arrested. On this day Atty. Kelly answers ready for jury trial, the prosecutor answers NOT READY. The Court without hesitation orders the case DISMISSED.
RESULT: OUI CASE DISMISSED
April 14, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 1951 CR 1781
Client, 35-year old male is charged with OUI-Alcohol after crashing his MV into orange barriers and a tree on a ‘newly partially constructed rotary’. The Client is alleged to have smelled of alcohol, unsteady on his feet, glassy eyes, slurred speech. He refuses to participate in ‘field sobriety evaluations’ and refuses the Breath test during his booking at the police station. The booking is video and audio recorded. The Client performs very well on the video, is not unsteady and answers all the questions politely and coherently. On this day of jury trial, Atty. Kelly aggressively cross examines the police officers and then plays the ‘booking video’ for the jury. After 25 minutes of deliberation, they return a verdict of NOT GUILTY.
RESULT: JURY VERDICT OUI – NOT GUILTY.
April 8, 2022
Newton District Court
Clerk-Magistrate Session
No. 2212 CR 14
Client, 51-year old male prominent Boston hospital doctor is charged by the police with making a false report and a fake 911 call. On this day, after many months of investigation and conversations with the Newton Police, it agreed to request that ‘criminal process’ NOT ISSUE. The Clerk Magistrate also agrees – the matter will stay open for several months and eventually criminal complaints will not issue ( as long as no further ‘problems’ arise ).
RESULT: CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS NOT ISSUED.
April 6, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2151 CR 167
Client, 71-year old grandmother is charged by Mass. State Police with operating a rental vehicle and leaving the scene after an accident. Atty. Kelly is appointed by the Court to assist and represent this woman. Atty. Kelly discovers that a witness to the accident claims it was a young Hispanic male who was driving the vehicle. As such, the prosecutor this day informs the Court that they wish for the case to be DISMISSED.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.
March 25, 2022
Middlesex Superior Court
No. 1681 CR 280
Client, 58-year old male self employed limo driver has been on Probation for several years. He is ordered to submit to a SCRAM device ( registers your alcohol content 4 times a day ) which of course requires him to stop what he is doing and ‘blow into’ said device. Atty. Kelly is retained to file a motion to Modify the Conditions of Probation, i.e. the SCRAM requirement. After hearing, the Court agrees and the device is terminated from his list of probation conditions.
RESULT: PROBATION CONDITION VACATED.
March 24, 2022
Concord District Court
No. 2147 CR 603
Client, 29-year old female school teacher is arrested for OUI Alcohol. She was stopped because she speeding thru a parking lot. She smells of alcohol and admits to drinking as reported by the police. She performs exceptionally well on all of the ‘field sobriety evaluations’ and refuses the ‘breathalyzer’ at the station. Her ‘booking video’ is unremarkable. Today a ‘bench trial’ [ before a judge only ] is held, Atty. Kelly cross examines the arresting officer. After which both the prosecutor and the defense rests. The Court renders it’s decision NOT GUILTY !
RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF OUI AFTER TRIAL.
February 11, 2022
Cambridge District Court
No. 2051 CR 894
Client, 44-year old male executive, is charged with OUI – Drugs, Neg. Operation of MV and several other motor vehicle offenses. In short, the Client rear-ended another MV at a traffic stop light, no injuries. Police arrive, and believe the Client is under the influence of alcohol because the ‘Officer smells an odor of alcohol on his person’. He is arrested and charged with OUI Alcohol. He is then brought to the police station and submits to a ‘breath test’ – the reading 0.00 ! NO ALCOHOL in his system. The police check his car and find a prescription bottle and decide to change the charge to OUI Drugs ! On this day the case is before the Court. The Prosecutor concedes that they cannot prove their case relative to the ‘amended’ charge of OUI – Drugs. The Court is somewhat confused why this case was even filed.
RESULT: OUI DRUG CHARGE DISMISSED.
February 9, 2022
Falmouth District Court
No. 2189 CR 1195
Client, 55-year old male, is charged with OUI, Negligent Operation of a MV and Possession of Cocaine with Intent to Distribute, etc. In essence the OUI portion of the criminal charges was overwhelming. A conviction of the drug charge to distribute was likely to result in incarceration. Atty. Kelly persuaded the prosecutor to Dismiss the Neg. Op. and Drug Charge to Distribute. As a result, the Client pled guilty to simple possession of Cocaine and his OUI charge was Continued Without a Finding. He was placed on Probation for 1 year.
RESULT: JAIL CONFINEMENT AVOIDED
January 25, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2151 AC 356
Client, 18-year old male, college freshman with no record of any kind is alleged to have operated his motor vehicle in a negligent manner, losing control and striking a concrete wall. Luckily he nor anyone else was injured. An application for a criminal complaint is sought by the police and Atty. Kelly is retained. A hearing is held on May 20, 2021 and the Clerk Magistrate finds probable cause for the issuance of the criminal complaint. However, Atty. Kelly with the assistance of the Prosecutor, asks the Court to defer the arraignment for 7 months to allow the Client to attend various programs and demonstrate the ‘true person’ he is. On this day, the Court dismisses the Complaint of Neg. Op. prior to arraignment and upon the request of a very understanding Prosecutor.
RESULT: CASE DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT CLEAN RECORD PRESERVED.
January 20, 2022
Middlesex Superior Court
No. 1981 CR 391
Client, 44-year old male on probation in Superior Court is alleged to have violated his terms and conditions of probation while serving a sentence in a county jail. Atty. Kelly is appointed by the Court to address the issue. Attorney Kelly argues that the Probation Officer’s claim that he violated a term of his probation is baseless. Namely, that he had indirect or direct contact with the victim of his case by allegedly writing her name on a piece of paper that was confiscated from his jail cell. The Court agrees that there is not probable cause to commence probation surrender proceedings. Application for further hearing DENIED.
RESULT: PROBATION SURRENDER APPLICATION DENIED – POSSIBLE FURTHER PERIOD OF INCARCERATION AVOIDED.
January 6, 2022
Waltham District Court
No. 2151 AC 1021
Client, 89-year old male retired executive for a major computer manufacturer is alleged to have struck an 83-year old male in a public parking and running over his body. Fortunately the individual did not suffer life threatening injuries. A criminal application is sought by the police and a hearing is held before a Court Magistrate. Atty. Kelly is retained prior and conferences the case with the responding police officer. At the hearing the police and Atty. Kelly jointly agree to request that the Court not issue a criminal complaint for negligent operation IN EXCHANGE for the Client agreeing to surrender his license for life. The Court agrees, criminal complaint does not issue.
RESULT: AVOIDANCE OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT.