Skip to main content
Steven John Topazio
Avvo
Pro

Steven Topazio’s Legal Cases

55 total


  • Payment for Sexual Conduct M.G.L. c. 272 § 53A

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case Dismissed.
    Description:
    The client, a 51 year old businessman, was arrested for sexual conduct for a fee after police observed a known prostitute walk up to the passenger side of the Client’s motor vehicle and get in. A prostitute (also called hooker, whore, ho, street walker, or escort) is a person who has sex with people for money. According to the police report filed in the case, the police believed that an act of prostitution was about to occur so they followed the motor vehicle and when it came to a stop and neither occupant exited the vehicle; they pulled their cruiser behind the vehicle and observed the Client with his pants down with his genitals exposed. The client hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend him. According to the police report, statements were made by both the Client and prostitute that $20.00 was paid for oral sex. Engaging in sexual conduct for a fee is a crime. Both the customer (also referred to as a john) and the prostitute can be charged with a crime provided there is evidence that the customer paid or offered to pay another person to engage in some form of sexual conduct. In order to be convicted of this crime some commercial transaction must be involved. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the prosecution and the court to dismiss the charge against his client on court costs. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Malicious Destruction of Property M.G.L. c. 266 § 127

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case Dismissed and probation renewed to original date.
    Description:
    The client, a 32 year old businessman, who was on probation, was arrested after jumping onto the hood and roof of a motor vehicle damaging it after police observed the client scratch a lottery ticket and scream into the air “YEEESSSS!!!!” The police asked the client how much he won on the scratch ticket then arrested him after they observed a large dent on the vehicle. After being arrested the client was found to be in the possession of Marijuana. Boston Criminal Defense Attorney argued that the client could not be found guilty of malicious destruction of property as the Commonwealth could not prove that the client acted willfully and with malice as required by statute when the car was damaged, and thus could not be convicted. An act is willful if it is done intentionally and by design, in contrast to an act which is done thoughtlessly or accidently. An act is done with malice if it is done out of cruelty, hostility, or revenge. Celebrating after winning a scratch ticket and then damaging the automobile is wanton behavior. An act of destruction is “wanton” if the person was reckless or indifferent to the fact that his conduct would probably cause substantial damage. Someone acts “wantonly” when he consciously disregards, or is indifferent to, an immediate danger of substantial harm to other people or their property. Today at trial, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to dismiss all charges against his client and caused probation to withdraw the probation violation notice. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Probation Surrender - Boston, Massachusetts

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Outcome:
    Detainer lifted and Client re-probated and released from custody.
    Description:
    The client, a 34 year old college graduate, was on probation and given a notice of Probation Violation Hearing after being arrested for Trespass. Although initially released on personal recognizance to appear at his final probation surrender hearing, the client was arrested again for trespass and held without bail on a probation detainer. When you are held on a detainer you are held without bail. You are not entitled to a bail appeal to Superior Court to review the detainer and you cannot get out of jail by posting bail. You must instead get your detainer lifted by the judge who held you on the detainer, or get the detainer lifted by the judge who will preside over your final surrender hearing, provided you are lucky enough not to be committed by that judge. Today, Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio convinced the Court to reprobate his Client after a plea of guilty time served on each trespass charge despite the Commonwealth’s recommendation to commit his client. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Sex Offender Fail to Register, M.G.L. c. 6 § 178H

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Outcome:
    Probation renewed to original date and Client released from custody.
    Description:
    The Client, a 40 year old with a criminal record which includes a sex offense in the State of Maine, was on probation in Massachusetts for failing to register as a sex offender here, was detained and held without bail when arrested again in Massachusetts for failing to register. The sex offender registration statute imposes different registration requirements on sex offenders depending on their circumstances and their classification level. For example, a sex offender moving into Massachusetts must initially register with the Sex Offender Registry Board on a Board-approved form within 2 days, while a sex offender moving out of Massachusetts need only “notify” the Board of his or her change of status within 10 days. Level 2 or 3 offenders must appear at the police department in the community where they live to verify their registration data or to notify the Board of certain changes in their status. Today, despite the probation departments request to commit the client for six months, Attorney Topazio was able to convince the Judge to re-probate his client only after agreeing to stipulate to a violation of lesser technical violations, instead of stipulating to failing to register. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Speeding Ticket Defense, M.G.L. c. 90 § 18

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jun 06, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case Dismissed.
    Description:
    The Client, a 50 year old father of three, received a civil motor vehicle citation after being caught on Lidar traveling 58 mph in a 35 mph zone, hired Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer, Steven J. Topazio, to represent him at the Magistrate Hearing. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced a Clerk Magistrate to find his Client not responsible. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Five year License Suspension for Breathalyzer Refusal reduced to 180 days

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    May 30, 2012
    Outcome:
    Five year suspension vacated and reduced to 180 days and Client immediately became eligible for a work hardship license.
    Description:
    The Client, a 50 year old RN, who previously received a CWOF on an OUI offense in 1980 and a second CWOF on an OUI offense in 1996 was arrested for a third offense OUI in 2009 and refused to submit to a Breathalyzer. Pursuant to the Safe Roads Act or (Melanie’s Law amendments) in 2005 to Chapter 90, section 24D(1)(f)(1), the Registrar suspended the Client’s license for a period of five (5) years for the breathalyzer refusal instead of 180 days, and an additional eight (8) years on the OUI offense after he pled guilty, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. On May 17, 2012, the Supreme Judicial Court, in the case of Souza v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, SJC-11123, concluded that the Legislature did not intend an admission to sufficient facts to be treated as a conviction pursuant to G.L. c. 90, § 24(1)(f)(1) and ruled that the registrar was not authorized pursuant to statute to suspend the plaintiff’s driver’s license for more than 180 days on account of his refusal to take a breathalyzer test, because the plaintiff had not previously been convicted of a violation of G.L. c. 90, § 24. Today, Attorney Topazio appealed his client’s suspension to the Registry of Motor Vehicles and by arguing the Souza case convinced the Registrar to vacate the five year suspension and reduce it to 180 days. Although the Client received an eight (8) year license suspension for the third offense OUI, due to the reduction in the license suspension, he immediately became eligible for a DWI work hardship license since he was more than 2 years into his DWI revocation. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Clerk Magistrate Hearing - Boston Massachusetts

    Practice Area:
    White Collar Crime
    Date:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case dismissed.
    Description:
    The client, a 32 year old professional with a part time job with Nordstrom, was caught on camera at Nordstrom taking merchandise without paying for it as well as crediting her credit card account with returns she made but without returning the merchandise. When the client was confronted by loss prevention officers in the presence of police, she admitted to her theft. Despite offering to pay Nordstrom back in full for the items taken which totaled over $4000.00, she was told that she would be pursued both civilly and criminally. Without being able to resolve the matter on her own, the Client hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to defend her. Attorney Topazio attempted to negotiate a settlement with Nordstrom but was informed that they were pursuing this matter criminally. The Peabody police filed an application for criminal complaint to be heard by a Clerk Magistrate. The primary role of the magistrate when she hears a complaint is to determine whether probable cause exists to require the accused to answer to a criminal charge. Magistrates, however, may decline to authorize complaints where the law allows the conflict to be fairly resolved in a different manner. In Gordon v. Fay, 382 Mass. 64, 69-70, 413 N.E.2d 1094, 1097-1098 (1980), the Supreme Judicial Court noted that the “implicit purpose of the [G.L. c. 218, §] 35A hearings is to enable the court clerk to screen a variety of minor criminal or potentially criminal matters out of the criminal justice system through a combination of counseling, discussion, or threat of prosecution.” Today, after establishing that the client made full restitution to Nordstrom, Attorney Topazio was able to persuade the Magistrate to dismiss all charges against his client. Contact Attorney Topazio online today by visiting www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Speeding Traffic Hearing - Boston, Massachusetts

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Aug 03, 2012
    Outcome:
    Not Responsible.
    Description:
    The client, a manager employed with EMC, received a traffic citation for speeding on the Mass Pike after leaving Logan Airport while traveling towards Worcester, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to represent him. Today, Attorney Topazio persuaded a Clerk Magistrate to find his client not responsible. Contact Attorney Topazio online today at www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • Probation Surrender - Larceny from a Person M.G.L. c. 266 § 30

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Outcome:
    Client released from custody and disposition of CWOF renewed.
    Description:
    The client, a 19 year old high school student, was detained on a probation detainer after he failed to report to probation, pay restitution, or comply with his probation officer, was represented by Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio. Attorney Topazio met with the supervising probation officer and negotiated a resolution of his client’s case. Today, Attorney Topazio convinced the court to release his client from custody, renew his probation and renew his client’s disposition of CWOF instead of changing the CWOF to a guilty finding on the added conditions that his client’s probation be extended and that he remain drug and alcohol free. Contact Attorney Topazio online today at www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.
  • OUI DUI Hardship License - Boston, Massachusetts

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Outcome:
    Work hardship license granted subject to interlock restrictions.
    Description:
    The Client, a 50 year old professional, lost his right to operate a motor vehicle for 8 years following a 3rd offense drunk driving conviction, hired Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Steven J. Topazio to help him obtain a hardship license. When the length of suspension is 8 years, the Registry of Motor Vehicles will allow an individual to become eligible for either a work hardship license after 2 years of the suspension, or a General hardship license after 4 years of the suspension. Today, Attorney Topazio established that his client had the appropriate documentation for a legitimate hardship establishing his client’s need for a hardship license after 2 years of his client’s suspension. Contact Attorney Topazio online today at www.topaziolaw.com or call 617-422-5803 to schedule a free consultation.