Does a dui show up on a quarry?
In Massachusetts once you are arraigned a DUI is entered on your CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information). While the case is a pending case - that is after arraignment but before a disposition (by way of either trial or an admission) - the case will be accessible on your CORI to people doing a record search. After a trial or an admission access to the record is governed by the result. If the case ends in a guilty finding then the case remains on your CORI and is accessible for 5 years from the date of conviction. If the case ends in a not guilty then access to the record of the case is denied. If the case ends in a straight dismissal (that is a dismissal without a continuance without a finding) access to the case is denied. If the case is continued without a finding and then dismissed then the case remains open and is accessible during the period of the continuance without a finding. Once the dismissal enters (at the end of the period of the continuance without a finding) then the case remains on your CORI but access to the case is denied to most people doing a record search. The details of the answer to your question are governed by the CORI laws and regulations.See question
Well, my misdemeanor case was just disposed with CWOF. I also received a probation period. Only now I'm somewhat confused. Is my case now considered to be closed and is it dismissed, or it's still open? If not, would it be considered closed and/o...
Your case has been CONTINUED without a finding. During the period of the continuance you are on probation. Your case is still an open case. It has not yet been dismissed. On the probation end date - assuming you have fully complied with all the conditions of probation - your case will on that date be dismissed. Then it will be a closed case. If someone does a CORI (record) check of your record now (during the period of the continuance) this case will show up as an open case. Once it is dismissed (at the end of the period of the continuance) then it will be a closed non-conviction. As such, most persons (but not all) seeking access to your CORI (criminal record) will be told you have no record. By the way, if you violate any condition of probation during the period of the continuance, the Judge can order the continuance of your case revoked, a guilty finding to be entered, and the Judge can impose any sentence provided for in the statute you violated. Good Luck.See question
A police officer to came to my home, asked me of my whereabouts on a particular day and time. I told him I was home. He informs me someone said I was in there home and asks me for ID then takes a picture of my ID with his cell phone.
You say the police officer asked you for ID. Did you give it to him? Did he ask you for permission to take a picture of your ID? Did you give him permission? Was the ID a driver's license or something else? In deciding whether the police acted lawfully or unlawfully, the devil is always in the details. You should remember the next time that the police knock on your door that you have the right not to answer the door; you have the right not to talk to the police; you have the right not to produce an ID in your own home. You have the right to say to the police "I am exercising my right to remain silent.". And then you can close the door.See question
I got arrested the other day for petty theft which is a Class A Misdemeanor in New Hampshire, I am a Massachusetts citizen. This is my first offense and I stole less than $50 worth of items. The New Hampshire state law states that "Theft constitut...
The lawyers who are telling you to get a NH lawyer are 100% correct. NH is very different from MA and the NH courts are much stricter with these offenses than are the MA courts. Get a good criminal lawyer who is licensed in NH and who practices in the Court where your case is.See question
I stole from Marshalls and the Loss Prevention employees took down my information. However, no police were called, and the merchandise was returned. The other person I was with received a copy of her sheet stating that she admits to stealing ..etc...
You do not have to be concerned about your not receiving the civil demand and you do not have to pay it. Whether the store and/or the police apply for a criminal complaint against you for shoplifting is completely independent of the civil demand.See question
I went to the courthouse to get my records on a case that I was found guilty on. The case file is lost and Ive made a motion for retrial for purpose of expungement. The court has no record what do you think my chances are and what should I expect
How old is your case? What court was it in? What were the specific criminal charges you were convicted of? Attorney Pang's answer, as always, is right on the money.See question
I was caught shoplifting, they took down my ID, took a picture of me, but didn't call the cops.They also banned me from the mall for 1 year. Will this be on my permanent record?
At the moment this "situation" does not appear in your Massachusetts CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information). If they never take you to criminal court in this case then you will not have a criminal record for this case. The store can take you to court without the police although normally the stores do go through the police department to bring a case to court.See question
Im going into court cause i bought a super pocket bike and it was stolen and i didn't know,i got written out bill of sale
From your post we cannot tell if you are charged with Larceny (actually stealing the bike) or Possession of Stolen Property. If you are charged with Larceny then the State has to prove that you actually took the bike and carried it away or that you assisted someone else in taking the bike and carrying it away. I am going to assume you are charged with Possession of Stolen Property (also referred to as Receiving Stolen Property). In order to prove this crime the State must prove the following three elements: (1) That the bike was in fact stolen; (2) That you knew or believed it was stolen; and (3) That you had possession of the stolen bike. With reference to the second element that you either knew or believed the bike was stolen a Judge would instruct a jury as follows (where it says "The Defendant" insert your name): "The Commonwealth must also prove that the defendant knew or
believed that the property was stolen. This is a question of the defendant’s
actual knowledge or belief at the time. Even if you find that, under the
circumstances, a prudent person would have known or believed that the
property was stolen, the defendant cannot be found guilty unless the
Commonwealth has proved that he (she) actually knew that the property
was stolen, or at least believed that it was stolen.
A person’s knowledge is a question of fact. Because you cannot look
directly into someone’s mind, a person’s knowledge is normally shown by
inferences from all the facts and circumstances surrounding the event.
You may infer that the defendant knew that the goods were stolen if the
Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
(possessed) (bought) (helped to conceal) recently stolen goods, and if the
facts and circumstances in this case support an inference that the
defendant knew that those goods were stolen. You should consider all the
facts and circumstances surrounding the defendant’s alleged (possession)
(purchase) (concealment) of stolen goods in deciding whether or not it is
reasonable for you to draw such an inference, and in determining whether
the Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant knew that the goods he (she) allegedly (possessed) (bought)
(concealed) were stolen. Remember: under such circumstances you may,
but you are not required to, draw an inference that the defendant knew that
the goods were stolen.
So the fact that you have a bill of sale may be a helpful piece of evidence for you. On the other hand does the bill of sale identify the person who sold you the bike? Is his/her name and address set forth on the bill of sale and are they real or make believe? Is the bill of sale for a reasonable amount of money given the value of the bike? Is the person who sold you the bike around? Do you know the person? How did you connect with the seller of the bike?
So as you can see, having a bill of sale is not the end all be all of this case. The question is does all the evidence support a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt that you either knew or believed that the bike was stolen. If a jury is convinces beyond a reasonable doubt that you knew or believed the bike was stolen - your bill of sale notwithstanding - then you will be found guilty. On the other hand if the Jury is not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that you knew or believed that the bike was stolen then you will be found not guilty. Get a lawyer and fight the case.
I had misdemeanor charges closed under CWOF in the state of Massachusetts. I do have very convincing explanation why did I allow it to happen ( even I had a very strong case ). Now I hope there is a way to get the case reopened and tried. I don't...
The answers of Attorney Cowan and Attorney Noble are correct. It can be done. Whether it can be done in your case depends on the particular facts and circumstances of your case. There has to be a legally sufficient reason for granting you a new trial (vacating the tender of plea). Did the Judge conduct a sufficient colloquy with you? Was the admission made knowingly and voluntarily? Was there a factual basis for the admission? If you had a lawyer, did his/her representation meet the legal standard of effective representation? These are the questions that a judge addresses in a Motion for New Trial. (It is called a Motion for New Trial, even though you did not go to trial. A Motion to Vacate a Plea or Admission is a Rule 30 Motion and is properly titled a Motion for New Trial.) By the way, it is not enough that now this CWOF is causing you problems; that alone is not a legally sufficient reason for granting a Motion for New Trial. Many people are denied gun permits, for example, because of old criminal cases that were continued without a finding; but that is not alone a legally sufficient reason for granting a Motion for New Trial. There are plenty of good criminal lawyers in the Ayer area who can address this. Be prepared to spend some money as these cases involve time and work. Good LuckSee question
What would you say the average time between a felony arrest and indictment. I know this is a broad question but let's say the case has already been handed over to the DA after arrest, they have all the evidence they're able to get and the case...
Your case assumes that there will be a presentment to the grand jury. The District Court does have jurisdiction over many (certainly not all) felonies and a decision may be made by the DA not to present the case to the grand jury. If the felony is a charge that the District Court does not have jurisdiction over, sometimes with good negotiations an agreement can be reached to reduce the charge to a charge that is within the jurisdiction of the District Court and again the case will not be presented to the Grand Jury. Let us assume that the DA has no interest in keeping the case in District Court and is determined to present the case to the Grand Jury. Presentment of a case to the Grand Jury is scheduled by a scheduler in the DA's Office (in Salem in Essex County). Cases can be and are prioritized. If for some reason the DA wants to seek a quick indictment the case can be presented to the Grand Jury quite quickly following the arrest. By quite quickly I mean within a matter of a week or two. In the majority of cases (that are not deemed high priority) a presentment is made to the Grand Jury usually within 45 - 90 days. This can vary, particularly if there are "discussions or negotiations" going on between the Defense lawyer and the Assistant DA assigned to the case. The strength of the case can play all kinds of roles. Sometime the DA's Office will use the threat of an indictment (in either a strong or weak case) to try to strong arm a plea in District Court. The District Court Judge can also play a role in this timing decision. The District Court Judge can schedule the case for a probable cause hearing. The DA's Office may not want to subject their witnesses to interrogation by defense counsel early on. To avoid a probable cause hearing the DA's Office can present the case to the Grand Jury before the date scheduled for the probable cause hearing in District Court and thereby avoid a probable cause hearing. As you said your question is a broad question and you will get a panoply of answers with all kinds of scenarios. Good Luck!See question