The following is a sample of cases Attorney Arthur L. Kelly has handled over the last 10+ years.

Amid the Covid-19 crisis, case posting(s) relative to recent cases will not likely occur regularly until the pandemic is under control and the courts are re-opened for usual business. Fortunately, I have been able to secure the release of several inmates who are awaiting trial – who have been considered ‘high risk’ for contracting the virus and/or effectuating the release of inmates prior to trial, by arguing for a lower bail or personal recognizance. Also a number of pending ‘open’ cases have been disposed off in a manner most favorable to my clients. However, less then a handful of my cases have gone to trial ( since March 16, 2020 ) [ bench trials only before just a judge ] jury trials however have recently resumed.

I wish all who visit this site, safeness and wellness now and throughout this pandemic – which as everyone knows – has affected and shaped our lives and all who we care for and love – in so many ways.

Take care, Arthur L. Kelly  11/24/2021

RESULTS OF THE LAST 96 out of 106 O.U.I. Trials and ‘other’ Criminal BENCH OR JURY TRIALS – NOT GUILTY OR DISMISSED !

Pending cases in various counties include 1st Degree Murder, Armed Robbery, Rape, White-Collar Crime, Trafficking in Drugs, Assault and Battery, Attempted Murder, OUI, Violation of Restraining Order, Juvenile Criminal Cases, etc.

2021 Case Summaries

November 23, 2021
Newton District Court
No. 2012 CR 136

Client, 24-year old female mental health receptionist, is driving with 2 friends when the vehicle she was operating collides with a traffic sign. The Client calls AAA a tow truck and police. The police inquire as to the accident and detect an odor of alcohol and claim she is unsteady on feet, slurred speech, etc. She agrees to perform several ‘roadside assessment tests’ – previously referred to as ‘field sobriety tests’. However, she is wearing a ‘walking boot cast’. Despite this, the police officer requests that she perform the one legged stand, walk straight line touch heel to toe etc. . Of course in the officers opinion she fails all the tests. She is arrested for O.U.I. and transported to the police station. On this day a trial is held before the Court and after intense cross examination of the arresting police officer and argument, the Court finds the Client NOT GUILTY OF OUI.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF OUI AFTER TRIAL.


October 25, 2021
Lowell District Court
No. 2111 CR 26

Client, 31-year old male Newton firefighter who on January 1, 2021 is riding home at 11 am with a male friend in his pick up truck after a New Years Eve party. For some reason the Client and his buddy decide to fire his licensed firearm into a wooded area at the end of a residential street. The friend is the person who actually fires the weapon. Neighbors are alarmed, police called and the truck is eventually stopped. The ‘friend’ is charged with possession of a firearm w/o a license and improper discharge of same ( said charge carries a minimum of 18 months in the House of Correction [ he is represented by other counsel ] ) The Client, according to a responding police officer allegedly smells of alcohol and is charged with carrying a licensed firearm while under the influence of alcohol. On this day of jury trial, the Prosecutor for various reasons, cannot present a case for trial. Atty. Kelly moves for a DISMISSAL – ALLOWED. Case dismissed.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED ON DAY OF JURY TRIAL.


October 13, 2021
Wrentham District Court
No. 1957 CR 207

Client, 25-year old female, drinking alcohol with her Mom and Aunt is stopped on her way home for speeding 20 mph over the speed limit. Her mom and Aunt were following behind. The police officer convinces her to take the Field Sobriety Tests ( never ever a good idea to do – you can refuse, simple as that ). It is the officers opinion she did not perform well and she is arrested for O.U.I. . On this day of trial, Atty. Kelly aggressively cross examines the lone police officer. At the conclusion of the trial the Court finds that the prosecutor did not sustain it’s burden to prove the Client guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.. As such, she is found NOT GUILTY after trial.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY O.U.I.

September 21, 2021
Waltham District Court
No. 2151 CR 705

Client, 42-year old college graduate and ‘ragging alcoholic’ and his girl friend of identical affliction – finds himself arrested after police arrive to investigate a ‘call for medical attention’ placed by the Client. The GF is covered in blood, he does not have a drop upon him. He is arrested because she says “he did this too me”. Days later she recants,
( claiming I fell and hit my head ) too late – he is held for 3 months. Atty. Kelly sets the case down for trial. On this day the case is DISMISSED ( Strangulation and Assault and Battery charges ) by the Court based upon a failure of the Prosecutor to assemble witnesses for trial. Client is released from jail and reunites with GF.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.

 

 

June 22, 2021
Waltham District Court
No. 1951 CR 773

Client, 50-year old non-US citizen is charged with OUI. It is alleged that he operated his MV erratically over a long stretch of public roadway that was witnessed allegedly by a civilian witness. Police respond to the area, Client is stopped and arrested. He is alleged to smelled of alcohol, unsteady on feet and fails ( according to the police officer ) all the field sobriety tests afforded him. He is transported back to the police station and booked in the usual manner. However a video camera is recording the entire process. On this day the case proceeds to trial before a judge alone ( the Prosecutor fails to introduce the video tape during his presentment ).

Atty. Kelly aggressively cross-examines the police officers’ involved and then plays the video ( which shows the Client in perfect position, proper speech, dexterity, walking and balance for over a half hour. After argument by both sides, the Court finds the Client NOT GUILTY.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF OUI AFTER TRIAL.

June 15, 2021
Cambridge District Court
No. 1852 CR 49

Client, 46 year-old mother and wife was employed by Harvard University and is alleged to have misappropriated thousands of dollars to herself. She is charged with 18 counts ranging from Larceny to Uttering False Receipt ( felonies ). Atty. Kelly is retained and replaces her previous attorney. He is successful in having 12 of the counts dismissed based upon ‘lack of evidence’ to proceed to trial. Over a course of 2-1/2 years and many Court appearances, the case is concluded this day. In essence, the Client does not plead guilty to any charges but is allowed to ‘admit to sufficient facts to warrant a finding of guilt’. She will be on probation for 2 years, after which ( if there is no further court involvement ) her case will be dismissed with no record of conviction.

RESULT: CASE CONTINUED WITHOUT A FINDING WITH THE EXPECTANCY OF DISMISSAL AFTER PROBATION.

June 1, 2021
Newton District Court
No. 2112 CR 197

Client, young college transfer student from France experiences severe issues relating to mental illness and is later charged with Malicious Destruction of Property ( a felony ) with regard to a hotel room. Atty. Kelly is retained and sets in motion a plan ( to which if accepted by the Prosecutor/Court ) will result in a dismissal. As such, the Client is examined by several mental health professionals, including doctors who eventually opine that the Client is/was not legally responsible for his actions. The case is dismissed this day prior to arraignment and the Client is returned home to France to seek the care he needs.

RESULT: CRIMINAL CASE DISMISSED BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT.

May 19, 2021
Newton District Court
No. 2012 CR 369

Client, 55-year old male with no prior criminal record is alleged to have assaulted and battered another male over a ‘senseless’ verbal argument.  However, the Client is charged with a felony ( A&B by means of a Deadly Weapon ‘his car’ ) , Threats and A&B ). During the pending process of the action, several motions were filed by Atty. Kelly, claiming that there is not ‘sufficient alleged facts’ relative to the charges of A&B / DW [ felony ] and Threats. The Courts agrees, those charges were dismissed before trial.  Prior to trial, Atty. Kelly attempts to persuade the Prosecutor that the ‘alleged victim’ statements and claims post the incident, are at the very least ‘fabricated’ and untrue. The case is called this day
for trial, the Prosecutor finaly agrees and indicates to the Court it cannot proceed to trial. Case DISMISSED.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED, CLEAN RECORD PRESERVED, FELONY CHARGES AVOIDED.

May 7, 2021
Cambridge District Court
Clerk Magistrate Session / First Criminal Session
No.(s) 2052 AC 724, 2052 CR 1182

Client, grown male and his male spouse, have apparently engaged in behavior that amounts to ‘assault and battery’ against each other on various dates during 2020. All though neither individual was arrested, a notice of hearing was requested for their appearance before the Court. On this day each ‘spouse’ invoked his ‘marital privilege’ [ effectively refusing to testify against the other ], as such both cases were dismissed on the basis of a lack of ‘probable cause’ to issue the complaint(s).

RESULT: Criminal Complaint Application(s) DENIED.

May 6, 2021
Waltham District Court
Clerk Magistrate’s Session
No. 2151 AC 140

Client, 28-year old male, is charged with Leaving Scene after an Accident, Suspended License and violation of Marked Lanes.  An abandoned truck is found along side the roadway which had apparently struck and damaged an ‘Exit Sign’.  Mass. State Police arrive and speak with a man some 500 feet from the accident, who denies any involvement in the ‘crash’. The Trooper researches the plate and discovers that said truck belongs to a contracting painting company.  The owner alleges that the Client would have been the operator of the vehicle at the time of the accident.  Today a hearing was held before the Magistrate who agreed with Atty. Kelly that there is ‘insufficient evidence’ to find probable cause necessary to issue a criminal complaint.

RESULT: Criminal Complaint(s) Not to Issue – Application DENIED.

April 8, 2021
Suffolk Superior Court
No. 2084 CR 307

Client, 42-year old male, previously convicted of Child Enticement for Sex is once again arrested and indicted on 7 Counts. The evidence involves the use of the internet and cell phone. The Client was ‘chatting’ with an undercover police officer in another state who was posing as an underage child. At the Client’s arraignment, the Court appoints Atty. Kelly to represent him. After a series of meetings and hearings before the Court over several months, an ‘un agreed plea’ offer is presented to the presiding judge. The Court fails to accept the Prosecutors or Atty. Kelly’s plea offer and proposes a sentence in the ‘middle’. As such, the Client plea’s guilty to all charges and sentenced to 3-4 years State Prison with probation ( 5 years ) [ and strict conditions ] after his release.

RESULT: Longer Term of Incarceration Avoided

April 7, 2021
Newton District Court
No. 1812 CR 159

Client, 52-year old male [ building contractor ] is alleged to have accepted monies from a homeowner and failed to do the work. He is charged with Larceny by Fraud and arraigned in criminal court. Atty. Kelly claims that the case is a civil matter and should have been brought in ‘Small Claims’ Court. After unnecessary months of hearing(s) and discussions with several prosecutors. The Commonwealth finally accepts Atty. Kelly’s view of the case and dismisses the matter this day.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED.

March 4, 2021
Suffolk Superior Court
No. 2084 CR 241

Client, 40-year old male, husband and father of 2 teenage children is indicted by the Attorney General’s Office on 12 counts of failure to pay ( payroll taxes to the Commonwealth ) between 2014 and 2017. The Client was the Owner and CEO of a transportation company within Massachusetts. The failure to pay the foregoing was due in large part to the downward turn in the economy and the advent of Uber and Lyft. Attorney Kelly is retained and proceeds to demonstrate to the prosecutor that although the Client has ‘committed’ the illegal act(s) as set forth in the indictments, his behavior ( prior to these indictments, the Client was without a criminal record entry on his record of any kind ) is not reflective of the person he truly is. As such, the case was eventually presented to a Justice of the Superior Court for ‘discussion’ relative to a plea.
Attorney Kelly ‘lobbied’ the Court to impose a CWOF [ continuation without a finding ] upon a plea of guilty. In essence, such a plea and disposition would eventually result in a DISMISSAL of all indictments after a successful period of probation. The prosecutor had requested a guilty finding. A CWOF in the Superior Court is a very rare disposition. Typically, a CWOF is a common disposition in the District Court only.  On this day, the Court accepted Attorney Kelly’s recommendation and the Client was placed on probation for 3 years with certain conditions of probation, i.e. community service, restitution, etc. . At the conclusion of probation, the Client will be afforded the opportunity to ‘seal’ his record from public view.

RESULT: CONVICTION AVOIDED – EVENTUAL DISMISSAL OF ALL CHARGES AFTER A PERIOD OF SUCCESSFUL PROBATION.

February 22, 2021
Newton District Court
No. 1912 CR 583

Client, 41-year old female, mother of 3 children under the age of 15 is arrested for OUI, endangering her children, leaving the scene of an accident and driving negligently. It was reported that Client had caused damage to a parked car while she was operating her motor vehicle. The police were summoned and engaged in conversation with her and allegedly detected the odor of alcohol, red eyes, etc. . She was arrested after failing ( in the police officer’s opinion ), several Field Sobriety Test’s . The case was scheduled before the Court numerous times in an effort to ascertain all information surrounding the event and perhaps resolve the matter. The prosecutor was unwillingly to accept Atty. Kelly’s proffered recommendation.  As such, Atty. Kelly scheduled the case for a ‘Bench Trial’ for this day 2/22/2021 (at the present time jury trials are not being held in view of the Pandemic ). The case was called for trial, the Prosecutor answered not ready, Atty. Kelly answered ‘ready’ for trial and had previously filed a Motion to Dismiss ( in the event the prosecutor was not ready for trial ). The motion was ALLOWED – CASE DISMISSED.

RESULT:  OUI AND OTHER DRIVING CHARGES DISMISSED ON DAY OF TRIAL.