Many online communications with an ex lead to this magistrate hearing. First count of criminal harassment. I'm wondering if it's considered a felony. I live in Massachusetts
Criminal harassment in Massachusetts is a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment in a house of correction for not more than 21/2 years or a fine of not more than $1,000, or by both.
Just because a magistrate issued the complaint for criminal harassment doesn't necessarily mean that the government can convict you of the crime charged. Retain an experienced criminal defense attorney to defend you on this case and refrain from further contact with your ex or any online postings on social media regarding your ex.See question
Alittle over 10 years ago i was charged with a felony assault and battery with deadly weapon since the time has passed i havent been in any legal troubles or been arrested I did have to pled guilty to the charger when i was first charged due to th...
Most felony conviction can be sealed after 10 years from the date of the conviction, if there has been no intervening conviction that "resets" the clock. It is fairly simple to administratively seal an old conviction that qualifies under G.L. ch. 276, s. 100A. However, it is best to at least consult an attorney to make sure that the sealing is done correctly so as avoid problems in the future, and to analyze your CORI to make sure that all charges are properly sealed.
Here is a link to a site that explains generally the process for sealing an old conviction via 100A:
Best of luck,
Now they sent a summons to the victim to appear in court to testify against me. Does the victim have to appear in court if they don't want to testify against me and will they get introuble if they don't go?
Your question presents an opportunity to clarify some points of law to the general public. It is true that the victim on a criminal case is not the one who "presses charges" against the defendant. It is the government, through its agents the police and the district attorney, that press charges against the defendant. The exception is when a private party seeks a private criminal complaint against a defendant, but that is not the situation presented here. Who brings the charges against the defendant is a question of criminal procedure.
The government still usually needs the victim to testify at trial, however. This requirement comes from the rules of evidence, specifically the rule prohibiting hearsay. That is, a police officer cannot testify at trial that the alleged victim said, "The defendant hit me" or words to that effect, because the victim's statement would be hearsay and hearsay is not admissible as evidence at trial.
A person who is summonsed to testify at trial cannot legally refuse to show up. In theory, when a witness is summonsed and does not show up, a judge can issue a warrant for their arrest. In reality, judges issues these warrants only in the most serious cases.
Even if the witness appears in court, that witness may have a privilege that allows them to legally refuse to testify. Commonly invoked privileges are a privilege against self incrimination (a so-called 5th amendment privilege) and a marital privilege (which allows one spouse to refuse to testify against the other spouse). If the witness invokes a valid privilege, and the government has no other evidence against the defendant other than the witness' testimony, the charges will have to be dismissed at trial.
To sum up: it is up,to the government, not the victim, to decide to bring charges against the defendant, but the victim can impact the outcome of the trial by not showing up on the trial date. If the victim simply ignores the summons, the victim is doing something illegal and a warrant could issue for his/her arrest, but if the victim invokes a privilege, then the victim does not have to testify and, unless the government has other evidence it can use to prove guilt (i.e. A videotape or another witness), the charge will be dismissed.
I just received my civil demand letter in the mail. I was caught with my friend shoplifting from sears. (1 shirt me) (2 shirts her) (both of us under $100). No police were involved. They just took us to a back room, took down our information, and...
You should not pay the civil demand. The store is not going to sue you over this. The civil demand amount that they could recover is limited to $500. The store will not likely sue you because it will cost the store more to sue you (paying for the lawyer, the filing fee, plus the efforts to recover any sort of judgement) than it could hope to recover. If it costs a store say, 1$ to mail out the civil demand letter seeking say $300 from every person who receives a letter, then it only takes 1 person who agrees to pay the $300 for the store to break even. If even 2 people agree to pay the civil demand, then the store makes money. The store is hoping that enough people simply agree to pay the civil demand to make some money from the demand. The store will not sue you next year for the civil demand either.
Paying the demand will not put you at risk of the shoplifting being discovered by future employers. The civil demand letter is not a public court document; it is simply a letter from the store's lawyer. The facts behind the civil demand do not become a public record unless and until the store files a lawsuit against you, which the store is very unlikely to do for the reasons stated above.
never received a extended restraing order is it over?
Warrants don't issue just because a restraining order issued against you. Restraining orders themselves are civil. Violating a restraining order is a criminal charge, but that doesn't seem to be something that happened here.
If the restraining order wasn't extended, then you aren't restrained anymore. However, just because you weren't served doesn't invalidate an order that was extended. Have a lawyer call the court on your behalf to see if the order was extended.
I was charged with reckless driving in New Hampshire as a Massachusetts resident years ago, and am currently applying for a Massachusetts LTC. Is this a criminal case that should be reported with the application or is that fully circumstantial? Co...
Reckless driving is s criminal charge and the pending criminal charge must be disclosed on the LTC application. The chief of police could deny your LTC license because of the pending charge.See question
Not my situation, how ever are the AP'S or Lps allowed to grab you ?
See Commonwealth v. Harris , 11 Mass. App. Ct. 165 (1981) "In Massachusetts a private person may lawfully arrest someone who has IN FACT committed a felony... The stricter requirement for a citizen's arrest -- that the person arrested be shown in fact to have committed a felony -- is designed to discourage such arrests and to prevent "the dangers of uncontrolled vigilantism and anarchistic actions." ...Generally, the person arrested must be convicted of a felony before the "in fact committed" element is satisfied and the arrest validated. If the citizen is in error in making the arrest, he may be liable in tort for false arrest or false imprisonment."
Loss Prevention officers are not police officers, but are rather citizens and if they tackle you, then they are effecting a citizen's arrest. The amount of property taken in Massachusetts for felony larceny is $250 or greater. In order for a loss prevention officer to perform a valid citizen's arrest, you must be stealing at least $250 in property.See question
In 2014 i got charged with a DUI , but i dont drink at all. when i got pulled over i had two pipes used for marijuana but I allowed a drug test so thats how that conjured up Into being a dui. It happen in DE but i had moved to MA for college and I...
You can be charged and convicted of a DUI (aka driving under the influence) without being under the influence of alcohol. It is a crime to drive under the influence of drugs as well as alcohol.
From what you say about a 12 week program and 6 negative screens, it sounds like you already plead out your case in DE. That is to say, your case in DE is not an open case, currently, and you are on some sort of probation, which requires you to do, amongst other things, a 12 week program and 6 negative drug screens.
If you have already plead out your case, and are seeking to do a program in MA that comports with the program requirements in DE, you would have to first find a program in MA that meets or exceeds the requirements in DE, and then seek permission from DE to do the MA program instead of the DE program. Massachusetts 24D programs are 16 week programs, but they don't include drug testing. You could possibly look for an out-patient drug abuse program that would randomly drug test you, and do this program in addition to the 24D program.
Best of luck,
I asked for a court-appointed lawyer when I first checked in with my court at my arraignment and they said I could get a reduced rate lawyer. When I got to the stand I thought I would have to represent myself to be able to get taken care of the sa...
You can still get a court-appointed lawyer, assuming that you still qualify from a financial perspective. You can ask the court to appoint you a lawyer when you show up at court on your next court date. In the alternative, you can go into court before the next court date, and ask the court to appoint you a lawyer right away. You definitely need a lawyer to defend you. There may be pretrial motions to litigate, there may be a trial, or there may be a host of other legal actions to take to properly defend you. An experienced criminal defense attorney is better suited than a lay person to do the tasks necessary to defend this case.
A word to the wise: it is not as easy to get a criminal case, even a case one might consider to be not a big deal, taken care of on the first court appearance. I see this happening all the time, where the defendant thinks because he didn't do anything wrong, or it was the other person's fault, or he was acting in self-defense, or the other witness is lying, or a host of other reasons that could be advanced as defenses at trial, that he can just tell the judge his side of the story and the whole thing will go away. This is not how the criminal justice system works most of the time. For persons with no prior record charged with very minor offenses that carry little if any potential jail time (for example, driving an unregistered and uninsured vehicle), these people can sometimes resolve their case on the first court date. For everyone else charged with a crime, the court will usually give you a date to come back for a pretrial conference. It is better to be represented by an attorney if the criminal charge continues beyond the first court date.