Skip to main content
Richard J. Sweeney
Avvo
Pro

Richard Sweeney’s Legal Cases

10 total

  • Name Withheld

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty
    Description:
    Client was found asleep at the wheel at night. Car was stopped in the center of a major intersection when witnesses called police. Police woke the client up and arrested him subsequently charging him with DUI. It was his third charge for that offense. Client found NOT GUILTY at jury trial when government could not prove operation.
  • Comm v Name Withheld

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Outcome:
    Case dismissed
    Description:
    Client accused of embezzling over One Million Dollars from parent company in New York. Attorney Sweeney was able to prove that the accounting procedures used by the company were insufficient to prove any embezzlement from the company. Case Dismissed against client
  • Commonwealth v John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Outcome:
    Drug Possession Charges Dismissed
    Description:
    Client arrested for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and during subsequent arrest drugs were found in his car and on his possession. Not guilty on the Driving Under the Influence case and all drug charges dismissed on day of trial.
  • Commonwealth v John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Outcome:
    Dismissed
    Description:
    Client accused of OUI and flunked the breathalyzer. Filed motion showing that proper procedures were not follwed when police gave the breathalyzer exam and the results were thrown out. At the subsequent trial the jury found the defendant not guilty.
  • Commonwealth v Numerous Clients

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Outcome:
    Dismissed PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT
    Description:
    Numerous defendants were arrested at a concert for being minors in possesion of alcohol. I was able to show that this was the first arrest for all of the parties and they were ordered to attend an alcohol education program and perform community service. At the completion their cases were dismissed prior to arraignement which meant NO CRIMINAL RECORD for all of these students as well as an awareness of the effects of alcohol from their education program.
  • Commonwealth v John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty
    Description:
    Police allege that client was seling drugs from his vehicle. After several motion hearings and trial the police were unable to prove that actual sale was made or that defendant was in possession fo the drugs as others were in the vehicle. Not guilty.
  • Commonwealth v Robert Diduca

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Outcome:
    Plea to minimum mandatory plus 3
    Description:
    Possession and Distribution of Child Pornography
  • Commonwealth v Local Police Officer

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Outcome:
    No Charges Filed Returned To Full Duty
    Description:
    Local Police Officer investigated by District Attorney's Office during Divorce.
  • State Police Officer Denied Gun Permit Renewal

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Aug 03, 2012
    Outcome:
    License Issued -Return to Full Duty
    Description:
    Massachusetts State Police Officer was denied a renewal of his License To Carry a Firearm due to an old record that was just uncovered. I was able to Re-Open each case and have them dismissed resulting in a clean record and the return of the Officer's License to Carry A Firearm allowing his Full Return to Duty.
  • Mass couple win $100,000 from Insurance Company after battle lasting several years

    Practice Area:
    Lawsuits & Disputes
    Date:
    May 31, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case settled for $100,000
    Description:
    A couple were investigated and denied payment for the loss of their boat after an arsonist lit a boatyard on fire. After a battle lasting several years and rising to the Appeals Court the Company settled with the couple and paid them $100,000 for the loss of their boat.