Lynn District Court - Commonwealth v. S.G. (Massachusetts State Police)
Mar 21, 2023
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI SECOND OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: A Massachusetts State Trooper observed the client traveling at 80 mph in a 50 mph zone while weaving between three lanes of traffic. After effectuating a motor vehicl...e stop of the client, the Trooper observed that the client had bloodshot and glassy eyes, slurred speech, and smelt strongly of an alcoholic beverage. The client admitted to drinking at dinner prior to driving. The client was given two field sobriety tests, which the Trooper deemed him to have failed. The client was placed under arrest and transported to the Danvers State Police barracks. When offered a Breath Test, the client refused, incurring a 3 years license suspension. At a jury-waived trial, through the cross examination and the use of Body Worn Camera footage, Attorney Higgins established for the judge that the client was Not Guilty of OUI. Following the trial, the judge allowed a Motion to Return the client's driver's license.
DUI and DWI
Brockton District Court - Commonwealth v. B.B. (Massachusetts State Police)
Mar 15, 2023
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: A Massachusetts State Trooper observed the client driving without headlights or taillights at 9:15 p.m. in the City of Brockton. The Trooper activated both his siren a...nd emergency lights in an attempt to stop the client. The client continued to drive for nearly half a mile according to the Trooper before pulling into a driveway on Newbury Street. The trooper testified that he observed the client stagger as he exited the vehicle. The trooper observed the client to have extremely slurred speech, bloodshot/glassy eyes and that he smelled strongly of alcohol. The client admitted that he was coming from a friend's house after leaving a bar. The trooper also testified that the client nearly fell while performing the Nine Step Walk and Turn. At one point, the Trooper instructed the client to sit against the push bar of his cruiser. When the client attempted to sit against it, the trooper said that the client nearly fell. After forming the opinion that the client was intoxicated, the trooper charged him with Operating Under the Influence of Liquor - Third Offense (minimum sentence of 180 days with 150 to be served in jail), Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Operating on a Suspended License for OUI while OUI (a conviction calls for a minimum jail sentence of 1-year on top of any sentence imposed on the OUI) and Operating a Motor Vehicle without an Ignition Interlock Device (6 month minimum jail sentence). Prior to trial, Attorney Higgins was able to have the OAS for OUI while OUI, Negligent Operation and IID charge dismissed, leaving only the OUI-3rd Offense. At a jury trial and through the cross examination of the trooper, Attorney Higgins was able to convince the jury that the client was Not Guilty. Upon the jury's verdict, Attorney Higgins filed a Motion to Return the client's license, which was allowed by the judge.
DUI and DWI
Newburyport District Court - Commonwealth v. F.B. (Amesbury PD)
Feb 27, 2023
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: An Amesbury police officer observed the client turn into the parking lot of a closed car dealership at approximately 2:00 a.m. The officer observed the client travel to... the end of a row of parked cars, position his vehicle next to them and then shut his vehicle's lights off. Suspicious of these actions, the officer began to investigate. When the officer spoke with the client, he observed that his eyes were bloodshot and glassy, his speech was slurred, and that there was a strong odor of alcohol emanating from his person. When asked where he was going, the client provided answers that did not make sense to the officer. The client admitted that he was coming from a bar and that he had consumed four or five drinks. When the officer concluded his investigation, he formed the opinion that the client was drunk and placed him under arrest. Having two prior offenses for drunk driving, the client was charged with OUI-Third Offense. At a jury-waived trial, Attorney Higgins, through the cross examination of the officer, highlighted for the judge that there was nothing about the client's operation of his vehicle that would suggest that his ability to operate was impaired. The judge agreed with Attorney Higgins and found the client Not Guilty. Following the trial, the judge allowed Attorney Higgins' motion to return the client's license, getting him out from under a five-year suspension.
DUI and DWI
Brockton District Court - Commonwealth v. P.A. (Bridgewater PD)
Jan 27, 2020
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: A Bridgewater police officer was traveling on Pleasant Street when he observed a gray Buick crossing both the double yellow center lines and the fog line. The officer ...observed at least four of these marked lanes violations. As the Buick continued, it came to a stop sign, but failed to stop. The officer then activated his cruiser's emergency blue lights and conducted a motor vehicle stop. The officer approached the driver, later identified at the client, P.A. The officer asked the client where he was going and where he was coming from. When the client responded, the officer observed that there was an odor of an alcoholic beverage, the client's speech was slurred, and his eyes appeared glassy. The client admitted consuming two and a half beers. Suspecting that the client was under the influence of alcohol, the officer ordered the client to exit his vehicle. When the client attempted to get out of his car, he fell into the driver's door. The officer then escorted the client to a safe location, where he administered a battery of field sobriety tests to include the Alphabet Tests, the Counting Backwards Test, the Finger-to-Nose Test, and the Nine Step Walk and Turn. The officer testified that following the client's performance, he formed the opinion that the client was intoxicated and placed him under arrest. Although not admitted into evidence at trial, the client registered a .15 BAC on the Breath Test back at the station. Through the cross examination of the arresting officer, Attorney Higgins was able to highlight for the jury the many things the client did correctly, demonstrating that his ability to drive was not impaired. After a 30 minute deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY. The verdict spared the client a minimum mandatory jail sentence of 150 days.
DUI and DWI
Quincy District Court - Commonwealth v. J.H. (Massachusetts State Police)
Jan 14, 2020
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: A Massachusetts State Trooper was traveling in the right lane of Route 3 South in the Town of Weymouth when his attention was drawn to a vehicle traveling at a high rate... of speed in the left lane. The trooper clocked the vehicle at 85 mile per hour. The trooper then observed the vehicle travel into the middle lane without signaling, and into the right lane, again without signaling. The trooper activated his blue lights and initiated a stop. The operator of the vehicle was identified as the client. When the trooper spoke with the client, he observed that the clients eyes were pinpoint, bloodshot and glassy. The trooper also detected a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the client's person. The client admitted to smoking marijuana before driving. Shortly after the trooper ordered the client out of the vehicle, he formed the opinion that the client was intoxicated and placed him under arrest. At a jury-waived trial, through the cross examination of the trooper, Attorney Higgins was able to demonstrate to the judge that the evidence did not rise to the level of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," the applicable standard at trial, resulting in a NOT GUILTY verdict. The client being charged with a 3rd Offense was spared a minimum mandatory jail sentence.
DUI and DWI
Peabody District Court - Commonwealth v. K.G.
Nov 13, 2019
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI FOURTH OFFENSE - NOT GUILTY: A Massachusetts State Trooper was working a construction detail on Route 1 North in the City of Peabody when a passing motorist drew his attention to a vehicle that wa...s operating erratically. The trooper pursued the vehicle and observed it to be straddling the marked lanes. The trooper activated his blue lights and initiated a stop of the vehicle. The trooper approached the vehicle, identified the client as the operator. The trooper detected a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from within the vehicle. Suspecting that the client might be under the influence of alcohol, he instructed her to pull into the parking lot of a Bertucci's restaurant that was right there. The client did as she was told and the trooper called for backup. A second trooper arrived on scene for the purpose of taking over the investigation. This trooper observed that the client's eyes were bloodshot and glassy, and that her speech was slurred. When asked, the client admitted to having two martinis. Upon learning this, the trooper ordered the client out of her vehicle for the purpose of administering field sobriety tests. The client was subsequently administered the Nine Step Walk and Turn, the One Leg Stand, the Alphabet Test, and the Counting Backwards Test. At the conclusion of the tests, the trooper formed the opinion that the client was intoxicated and placed her under arrest. Upon being arrested, the client pleaded with the trooper to let her go and became uncooperative. At a jury trial, Attorney Higgins cross examined both State Troopers, addressing deficiencies in the investigation, as well as appropriate actions taken on the part of the client. After a 45 minute deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY. The client, facing a Fourth Offense, was spared a 1-year minimum mandatory jail sentence.
DUI and DWI
Brockton District Court (Bridgewater Police) - Commonwealth v. R.H.
Jul 17, 2019
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI FIRST OFFENSE - A Bridgewater Police officer was conducting routine patrol in the area of Central Square when he observed the client's vehicle enter a rotary traveling in the wrong direction. The ...officer activated his blue lights and the client corrected his direction of travel and pulled over. The officer testified that the client had bloodshot and glassy eyes, slurred speech, and smelled strongly of an alcoholic beverage. When the officer asked the client where he was coming from, the client responded by saying "the Brockton/Bridgewater line", despite the two municipalities not sharing a common boundary. The officer then asked the client to exit his vehicle to perform field sobriety tests. The client was asked to recite the Alphabet, which he was able to do, but according to the officer, with slurred speech. The client was then asked to count backwards from 99-76. The client mixed up several of the numbers and stated "I'm bad at math." The officer then asked the client to perform the Nine Step Walk and Turn, and the One Leg Stand. On the Nine Step Walk and Turn, the officer testified that the client used his arms for balance and did not touch heel to toe. On the One Leg Stand, the officer testified that the client could not keep his foot off the ground for more than three seconds. At the conclusion of field sobriety testing, the officer testified that he formed the opinion that the client was "drunk." Through the cross-examination of the officer and by highlighting many of the things the client did correctly, Attorney Higgins was able to convince the jury that the client was Not Guilty of OUI.
DUI and DWI
Plymouth District Court (Halifax Police) - Commonwealth v. S.S.
Jul 15, 2019
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - Halifax Police officers were dispatched to the area of Thompson Street for a report of an erratic operator. As one of the officers turned onto Thompson Street, he observed the clie...nt's vehicle approaching him from the opposite direction. As the client's vehicle neared, the officer observed the client's passenger-side tires cross the fog line. The officer conducted a U-turn and activated his blue lights in an attempt to stop the client. The client made a righthand turn onto Route 106. As the officer was behind her, the client made a left turn onto a local residential street and came to a stop. When the officer approached the client's driver's side, he noticed that the window was up. The officer knocked on the window and the client rolled it down. The officer was met with a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the client's breath and observed that her eyes were glossy and bloodshot. When the officer asked the client where she was going, the client responded by stating that she was heading to Middleboro. The officer informed the client that she was traveling in the opposite direction of Middleboro. The officer asked the client for her license, but the client was unable to produce it. Believing that the client was drunk, the officer asked her to get out of the vehicle to perform field sobriety tests. When the client exited, the officer noted that she appeared unsteady on her feet. The client repeatedly stated that she did not know what was going on. The officer administered the Nine Step Walk and Turn, the One Leg Stand and the Finger-to-Nose test. On the Nine Step Walk and Turn, the client stepped on her own foot on steps two and three. The officer stopped the test. On the One Leg Stand, the client placed her foot down on three occasions and was unable to hold her foot up off the ground for more than a few seconds at a time. On the Finger-to-Nose Test, the client touched the middle of her nose, as opposed to the tip of her nose, as she had been instructed. Following her performance on the field sobriety tests, the client was placed under arrest. At the station, the client refused to submit to the Breath Test, resulting in a 5-year license loss. During the pendency of the case, Attorney Higgins filed a motion to suppress incriminating statements alleged to have made by the client. That motion was allowed, resulting in the exclusion of many damaging statements from evidence at trial. During the trial, through the cross examination of the Commonwealth's witnesses, Attorney Higgins was able to demonstrate to the jury that there were many things that the client did correctly, and despite both officers forming the opinion that the client was "drunk", the evidence supported the conclusion that she was not. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty, sparing the client a minimum mandatory jail sentence. Following the trial, Attorney Higgins filed a Motion to Return License. The judge allowed that motion, ordering the Massachusetts RMV to reinstate the client's license.
DUI and DWI
Concord District Court (Maynard Police) - Commonwealth v. J.I.
Mar 06, 2019
OUTCOME: Dismissed
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - A Maynard Police Officer observed the client's vehicle approaching him from behind at approximately 8:30 p.m. in September of 2018. As the client's vehicle neared, the officer pull...ed his cruiser into a nearby parking lot. When the client's vehicle passed the officer's location, the officer detected an overwhelming odor of burnt marijuana. The officer activated his cruiser's blue lights and began pursuing the client's vehicle. The client did not stop immediately, rather he continued for approximately 3/4 of a mile. While the officer was behind the client, he observed the client's vehicle leave the roadway and travel onto the curb. When the client eventually stopped, the officer approached and observed that the client's eyes appeared bloodshot and glassy, he had a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his person, and his speech was slurred. The officer also detected the odor of marijuana. When the officer asked the client to get out of his vehicle, he observed that the client was unsteady on his feet. The client was then asked to perform the One Leg Stand and the Nine Step Walk and Turn. The officer observed the client to have great difficulty with these exercises and placed him under arrest. Attorney Higgins filed a pre-trial Motion to Suppress the stop of the client's vehicle, arguing that the odor of marijuana was insufficient to provide the officer with "reasonable suspicion" to justify the stop. At a hearing on the motion, the judge agreed. Following the allowance of the motion, the case was dismissed.
DUI and DWI
Taunton District Court (Taunton Police) - Commonwealth v. L.C.
Mar 04, 2019
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
OUI THIRD OFFENSE - Taunton Police officers were dispatched to a report of a motor vehicle accident involving a pickup truck into a telephone pole. When the first officer arrived and interacted with t...he operator, later identified as the client, she placed him in the back of her cruiser until another officer arrived. When that officer arrived on scene, he began questioning the client regarding his whereabouts and alcohol consumption. At a pre-trial motion to suppress challenging the admissibility of the client's answers, Attorney Higgins was successfully able to have those statements excluded from evidence. At the actual trial, during the cross examination of the two police officers, as well as a civilian witness, Attorney Higgins highlighted drastic inconsistencies in the testimony and offered plausible explanations for the client's poor performance on Field Sobriety Tests. One officer testified that she could not detect any odor of alcohol coming from the client and that his speech was not slurred, while the other officer testified that he did detect an odor of alcohol and that the client's speech was slurred. Attorney Higgins offered evidence that the client suffered from a medical condition that seriously impacted his balance and coordination, effectively discrediting the observations made by the officer during Field Sobriety Testing. In the end, having found reasonable doubt, the judge returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
