Case Results – Operating Under the Influence (OUI)

Free Initial Consultation to Discuss Your Case • Call (508) 584-6955

Criminal Defense Attorneys Justice for AllCriminal Defense Representation

The Noonan Defense Firm rigorously defends clients charged with any criminal charge so no matter where you are located in Southeast Massachusetts, expert legal help is just a phone call away. To schedule a free, no-obligation case review and consultation with an experienced criminal defense trial lawyer call our law offices at (508) 584-6955.

When you make the call, rest assured you have taken your first step to find out how best to confront the charges you are facing. You can also use our Free Case Evaluation Form to submit information about your case in confidence, or to request that we contact you.


April 25, 2017
Commonwealth v. E.B.
Taunton District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS A NOT GUILTY ON A SECOND-OFFENSE DRUNK DRIVING CASE.

The client is a 33 year-old financial consultant from Easton, MA. The police officer testified that he was stopped at a gas station when his attention was drawn to the sound of a car horn beeping for about 5 seconds. The officer followed the vehicles as they approached an intersection. The police officer observed the Defendant’s vehicle abruptly cut off the other driver causing the other vehicle to slam on its brakes and swerve to avoid a collision. The officer pulled over the Defendant’s car. When he approached the Defendant’s window, the officer observed that the Defendant’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot and he could smell an odor of alcohol on the Defendant’s breath. The officer testified that the Defendant initially stated that he did not consume any alcohol but later admitted to drinking at a strip club. The officer testified that the Defendant failed each and every field sobriety test. The officer testified that the Defendant failed the Alphabet Test twice, the Defendant failed the Nine Step Walk and Turn Test, and the Defendant failed the One-Leg Stand after attempting it twice.

Result: At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan effectively cross-examined the police officer and pointed out the inconsistencies in his testimony. Attorney Noonan pointed out everything the Defendant did well on the field sobriety tests, which the officer left out in his direct examination. Attorney Noonan introduced photos of the Defendant’s shoes to show how difficult it would be for someone to perform these field sobriety tests with this type of footwear, which had no ankle support. Attorney Noonan cross-examined the other driver and pointed out that the other driver had been speeding and he lost his patience when following the Defendant because the Defendant was not driving fast enough. Attorney Noonan called as a witness the police officer who booked the Defendant at the police station. Attorney Noonan established that the booking officer had booked the Defendant, in a small booking room, for about an hour. In a critical line of questioning, Attorney Noonan got the booking officer to testify that he could not formulate an opinion about the Defendant’s sobriety even though he had booked him for about an hour. After Attorney Noonan’s closing argument, the judge immediately found the Defendant Not Guilty. This was the Defendant’s second offense for drunk driving and he was facing possible jail time, a three year loss of license, and mandatory inpatient treatment.


April 13, 2017
Commonwealth v. J.L.
Hingham District Court

JUDGE DISMISSES CASE WITH PREJUDICE AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THAT THE POLICE OFFICER LIED TO THE COURT.

The Defendant, a resident of Hull, was charged with Operating under the Influence of Liquor. A civilian witness reported to Hull Police that the Defendant’s vehicle crossed into his lane, struck the side of his vehicle, and continued driving without pulling over. The witness approached the Defendant at a stop sign and asked him to pull over but the Defendant continued driving for over a mile before pulling into a plaza to pick up a pizza he had ordered. The witness called the police to report the hit and run. When the police arrived to the parking lot, the officer observed that the Defendant was unsteady on his feet and appeared to be intoxicated. The officer asked the Defendant to perform a series of field sobriety tests. From the start, the Defendant, in the officer’s words, was defiant, uncooperative, and argumentative. The Defendant insulted the officer. The officer found that the Defendant failed each and every field sobriety test that he performed and placed him under arrest for OUI-Liquor and Negligent Operation. Back at the police station, when the Defendant was being booked, the arresting officer stated that the Defendant continued to be defiant, uncooperative, and argumentative. The officer stated that the Defendant claimed that he was not the operator of the vehicle when he previously admitted that he was the operator. At the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan called the Booking Officer to testify as a witness. Attorney Noonan called the Booking Officer to impeach the testimony of the arresting officer. During booking, the Booking Officer observed that the Defendant’s speech was “fair,” which contradicted the arresting officer’s observation that the Defendant’s speech was thick-tongued and slurred. More importantly, the Booking Officer observed that the Defendant’s “attitude was indifferent” and there were “no unusual actions” by the Defendant, which contradicted the arresting officer’s repeated assertions that the Defendant was defiant, argumentative, uncooperative, and insulting. As the trial started, the District Attorney received word that the Booking Officer could not appear to the trial because he was “sick.” Attorney Noonan asked for a continuance of the trial because the Booking Officer was an important witness for the defense. When the Defendant left the courthouse and was driving home, he saw the Booking Officer performing a detail and directing traffic. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss with prejudice on the grounds that the Booking Officer lied to the court when he represented that he was out sick when, in actuality, he was not sick but performing a paid detail. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained documentation showing that the Booking Officer performed a paid detail on the day of trial from 7:00 AM to 8:30 PM for 13.5 hours.

Result: After Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence to show that the booking officer lied to the court, the Judge dismissed the OUI-Liquor charge, with prejudice, and found that the booking officer’s conduct was egregious. The case was dismissed with prejudice meaning that the Commonwealth cannot charge the Defendant with the same offense in the future. This is a rare case where a Judge dismissed a criminal charge with prejudice as a sanction for egregious police misconduct.


April 4, 2017
Commonwealth v. D.M.
Brockton District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THAT THE STATE POLICE UNLAWFULLY DETAINED HIS CLIENT AT A DRUNK-DRIVING ROADBLOCK, WHICH RESULTED IN THE DISMISSAL OF THE CASE EVEN THOUGH HIS CLIENT HAD A BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT OF 0.81%.

On May 28, 2016, the State Police were conducting an OUI Roadblock, as referred to as a Sobriety Checkpoint, on Route 18 in Abington. The Client, who was returning from a wedding, approached the checkpoint in his vehicle. At the checkpoint, the State Trooper believed that the Client was exhibiting signs of intoxication so he had the client get out of his car and submit to field sobriety tests. The State Trooper found that the client failed three of the field sobriety tests. The State Trooper had the client blow into a portable breath test device, which showed that the client had a blood alcohol content of 0.81%, which is above the legal limit in Massachusetts. The State Trooper then arrested the client and charged with Operating under the Influence of Liquor.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that his Client was unlawfully detained by the State Trooper. Specifically, Attorney Noonan argued that the State Trooper did not have enough evidence to order his Client to get out of his vehicle and submit to the field sobriety tests. At a Hearing in which the State Trooper testified, Attorney Noonan proved that the only evidence of possible intoxication that led the Trooper to detain his client was the Trooper’s observation that the Client’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot. Attorney Noonan introduced a color copy of the Client’s booking photo, which clearly showed that his Client did not have glassy or bloodshot eyes. The Judge agreed with Attorney Noonan that the State Trooper did not have enough evidence to detain his client. Therefore, the Judge suppressed all evidence that was obtained as a result of his Client’s unlawful detention, which included all field sobriety tests and the breath test result of 0.81%. Because the majority of the evidence was suppressed, the District Attorney was forced to dismiss the case.


March 30, 2017
Commonwealth v. E.B.
Dedham District Cour
t

FINANCIAL ADVISOR FACING MANDATORY 60-DAYS IN JAIL AND A 1 YEAR LOSS OF LICENSE HAS CASE DISMISSED ON FIRST COURT DATE.

Client, a 33-year-old financial advisor from Easton, was pulled over by State Police for a motor vehicle infraction. Client had a prior conviction for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol (OUI). In addition, prior to being pulled over in this case, Client had been arrested for a Second-Offense OUI. When the Client was pulled over in this case, his driver license was suspended for 180 days because he refused the Breathalyzer Test when he was arrested for the second-offense OUI. The Client was arrested and charged with Operating with a Suspended License while his License was suspended for OUI pursuant to G.L. c. 90, § 23 and, if convicted for this offense, the Client was facing a mandatory jail sentence of 60 days and a 1-year mandatory loss of license.

Result: On the first court date, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinced the Judge and the Assistant District Attorney to dismiss the charge upon the payment of court costs and Attorney Noonan saved his client from serving 60 days in jail and having a 1-year loss of license.


February 24, 2017
Commonwealth v. Matt Murphy
Brockton District Court
Docket No.: 1515 CR 0403

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN CONVINCES JUDGE TO ORDER DRUG TREATMENT INSTEAD OF JAIL TIME FOR MAN WHO OVERDOSED ON HEROIN WITH AUTISTIC CHILD IN CAR.

Brockton Police were dispatched to the Mobile Gas Station in Brockton for a report of a male who had overdosed in his car with a small child in the backseat. When officers arrived, Defendant was slumped over the steering wheel with the engine running, the car in gear, and the car in reverse. Officers had to smash the window to gain access to the Defendant who was unconscious. Defendant had overdosed after injecting himself with heroin. Officers had to administer two separate doses of the overdose-reversing drug Narcan in order to revive the Defendant. The Defendant’s 10 year-old severely autistic son was in the backseat. The child was unable to speak due to his severe autism. Police found heroin and syringes in the car. The heroin was tested and found to contain the highly volatile substance Fentanyl. The Defendant admitted to police that he drove to the gas station and that he consumed heroin. Defendant was charged with: Operating under the Influence of Drugs, Child Endangerment, and Possession of Fentanyl.

ResultThe case was un-triable, as the Commonwealth would have little difficulty proving its case. Attorney Noonan had no alternative but to plea his client out. The District Attorney asked the Judge to lock the Defendant up for 90 days. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan requested that his client be given a suspended sentence, instead of jail time, and placed on probation for three years with conditions aimed at treating his drug addiction. The Judge agreed with Attorney Noonan and imposed a suspended sentence of 6 months with three years of probation and conditions of drug treatment.

“Brockton overdosed driver avoids jail time in favor of treatment.” http://saugus.wickedlocal.com/news/20170224/brockton-overdosed-driver-avoids-jail-time-in-favor-of-treatment


July 19, 2016
Commonwealth v. David A.
Brockton District Court

OUI-SERIOUS BODILY INJURY:  DISMISSED AT TRIAL (lack of evidence)

Defendant was alleged to have caused a major motor vehicle accident resulting in serious injuries to his passenger and himself. Defendant was driving a vehicle on Route 24 South with a female passenger in the front seat. Witnesses told police that they saw the vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed and abruptly swerve into the Burger King rest area and then crash into the rear of a parked 18-wheel tractor-trailer. The vehicle was completely crushed and lodged underneath the rear of the tractor-trailer. Upon arrival, Defendant and the passenger were unconscious and unresponsive. As the Defendant was unconscious in the driver’s seat, police officers detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from him. The Defendant and the female passenger were taken by helicopter to the Rhode Island Hospital. The female passenger remained in the hospital for nearly one month. She sustained serious bodily injuries, including: partial blindness in one eye, head trauma, broken bones (especially in the legs), and internal injuries. Police interviewed the Defendant’s wife who stated that the Defendant had issues with alcohol and cocaine use. Police interviewed the Defendant who admitted to consuming beer prior to the accident.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan examined a civilian witness who was the first responder. Prior to any police arriving to the scene, this witness went over to the vehicle, looked in, and checked on the status of the Defendant and passenger. This witness attempted to speak to them but received no response. This witness physically went inside the vehicle and physically extricated the female passenger from the vehicle. The witness was unable to extricate the Defendant. During Attorney Noonan’s examination, the witness stated that he did not detect any odor of alcohol inside the vehicle and he did not detect any odor of alcohol coming from the Defendant – which was inconsistent with the reports of police that they detected an odor of alcohol coming from the Defendant, as he lay unconscious in the driver’s seat.  The Commonwealth sought to obtain the Defendant’s hospital records from the Rhode Island Hospital. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan objected to the Commonwealth’s request to subpoena the hospital records – but a Brockton District Court Judge issued a court order for the Defendant’s hospital records. In order to lawfully obtain a person’s medical records from the Rhode Island Hospital, the requesting party must comply with the laws of Rhode Island. Here, the Commonwealth obtained a Massachusetts Court Order, but did not comply with Rhode Island law. Attorney Noonan pressed hard for a trial date. On the day of trial, the Commonwealth was unable to obtain the Defendant’s hospital records. The Commonwealth requested a continuance in order to obtain the Defendant’s hospital records. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan objected to the continuance and stated that he was ready for trial. The Commonwealth was unable to proceed without any medical evidence. As a result, the case was dismissed on the trial date. Had the client been convicted, he faced a minimum mandatory jail sentence of six-months and an automatic 2-year loss of license. The Defendant owned and operated a professional truck driving business and his business would have been ruined if he were convicted.


June 7, 2016
Commonwealth v. R.S.
Fall River District Court

DANGEROUSNESS HEARING:               RELEASED FROM CUSTODY

Fall River Police were dispatched to the scene of a motor vehicle crash involving two vehicles. Officers observed front-end damage to the Defendant’s vehicle. Officers observed rear-end damage to the second vehicle. The operator of the second vehicle told police that he pulled over to the right-hand side of the road to take a phone call when he was rear-ended by the Defendant’s vehicle. The other operator had to assist the Defendant from his vehicle. The other operator told police that he believed the Defendant to be intoxicated. Upon speaking with the Defendant, police immediately observed a strong odor of alcohol, glazed eyes, and slurred speech. Defendant agreed to participate in field sobriety tests. Defendant failed all the field sobriety tests. Defendant was placed under arrest for OUI-Liquor, Negligent Operation, and Marked Lanes Violation. During booking, police discovered that the Defendant had three prior convictions for OUI-Liquor with the most recent conviction being in 2015. Defendant was arraigned on the charge of OUI-Liquor Subsequent Offense. Because this was the Defendant’s fourth offense for OUI-Liquor, the Commonwealth moved to have the Defendant held in custody during the pendency of his case under the Dangerousness Statute. The Commonwealth argued that: based upon the nature of the offense and the Defendant’s criminal history, no conditions of release would reasonably assure the safety of the community. If successful, the Defendant could be held in custody for up to 180 days.

Result: At the conclusion of the dangerousness hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was successful in persuading the court to release the Defendant from custody. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that there were conditions that the court could impose that would reasonably assure the safety of the community. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan advocated that the court impose certain strict conditions that would reasonably assure the safety of the community. The Judge adopted Attorney Noonan’s recommendation and released the Defendant upon certain strict conditions. As a result, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan saved his client from serving considerable jail time (up to 180 days), as his case was pending.


September 3, 2015
Commonwealth v. P.C.
Falmouth District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (subsequent offense): NOT GUILTY

A Bourne Police Officer conducting radar patrol on the highway detected the Defendant’s vehicle traveling at 86 mph and stopped his vehicle. The officer approached the Defendant on the driver’s side. The officer noticed that Defendant stared straight-forward when answering the officer’s questions. The Defendant admitted to consuming alcohol. When the officer asked whether the amount of alcohol he consumed would affect his ability to operate his vehicle the Defendant answered “sure.” When speaking to the Defendant outside the vehicle, the officer had to ask the Defendant repeatedly to remove his hands from his pockets. The officer noted that the Defendant was belligerent, argumentative and defiant when asked questions. The Defendant would sigh and curse. The Defendant passed the Alphabet Test. With regards to the Counting Test, the Defendant said, “You fucking do it.”

Result: After a bench trial in which Attorney Gerald J. Noonan vigorously cross-examined the officer, the judge found the Defendant Not Guilty. The Defendant was charged with second offense OUI and had a third OUI pending at the time of trial. Attorney Noonan saved his client from facing a third offense OUI.


July 2, 2015
Commonwealth v. E.G.
Hingham District Court.

OUI-LIQUOR (second offense): NOT GUILTY

A civilian witness testified that she was driving on Route 3 South when she was almost struck by a large SUV driving erratically. She followed the SUV and observed that it was “all over the road” in that it almost struck the guardrail in the breakdown lane. A State Trooper observed the SUV driving erratically at a high speed and almost hit the guardrail. There was a passenger passed out in the front seat. The Trooper detected a strong odor of alcohol. The Defendant failed all three field sobriety tests. At the police station, Defendant was verbally assaultive and uncooperative.

Result: After a jury trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan got a Not Guilty, and client avoided a convicted for second offense OUI, which carries a possible 60 day jail sentence and three-year loss of license.


June 8, 2015
Commonwealth v. T.M.
Brockton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (second offense): NOT GUILTY

An off-duty sheriff testified that he was returning home from work when he observed the Defendant’s vehicle abruptly cut him off, travel at a high rate of speed, cross over the center line four times, travel in the opposite lane, and almost strike the shoulder of the road. The sheriff observed the Defendant slam on his brakes at a stop sign and skid to a stop with his vehicle parallel to oncoming traffic. The sheriff conducted a motor vehicle stop and radioed police. Police observed a half-empty 12 pack of beer in his car. Police observed that his speech was very slurred, his eyes were glassy and bloodshot, and that he was unsteady on his feet. Defendant failed the nine-step walk and turn and the one-legged stand tests. A portable breath test gave a result of 0.19%. During booking, Defendant stated that he had stopped drinking for four years and all it takes is “a few too many.”

Result: After a jury trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan got a Not Guilty, and client avoided a convicted for second offense OUI, which carries a possible 60 day jail sentence and three-year loss of license.


March 24, 2015
Commonwealth v. D.H.
Brockton
District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (second offense): NOT GUILTY

A gas station employee called 911 and reported that the Defendant pulled into the gas station and exited his vehicle and appeared to be very drunk and observed that the Defendant had fallen over. Police arrived and observed that the Defendant smelled strongly of alcohol, that his eyes were bloodshot and red, and that he was very unsteady on his feet. The police officer testified that he could not conduct any physical field sobriety tests because the Defendant was “highly intoxicated.” The police officer testified that he did not administer any physical field sobriety tests because he was concerned that the Defendant would fall and injure himself.

Result: After a jury trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan got a Not Guilty, and client avoided a convicted for second offense OUI, which carries a possible 60 day jail sentence and three-year loss of license.


November 25, 2014
Commonwealth v. M.K.
Dedham District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: NOT GUILTY

On July 8, 2013, Detective O’Connor of the Stoughton Police observed the Defendant’s vehicle traveling on Park Street / Route 27 in the town of Stoughton without any headlights on. Defendant committed a marked lanes violation and almost struck the police cruiser causing Detective O’Connor to swerve to the right in order to avoid a collision. Detective O’Connor pulled the Defendant over in a parking lot. When approached, Defendant looked at the Detective with a blank stare. She did not roll down her window. When she opened her door, the detective was “struck with an over powering odor of alcohol.” He observed that the Defendant’s eyes were bloodshot. Defendant’s speech was slurred. She could not locate her license or registration. Defendant admitted to consuming wine. Defendant had to use her vehicle and lean against the vehicle for balance. Defendant failed the one-legged stand and nine-step walk and turn. When arrested, Defendant gave a false last name. After a jury trial, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan obtained a not guilty verdict and the jury only deliberated for approximately 30 minutes. Attorney Noonan thoroughly discredited the arresting officer. In addition, Attorney Noonan showed that the Defendant’s poor performance on the field sobriety tests were due to the fact that she was wearing flip-flops, which impeded her performance. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the officer’s description of the Defendant’s vehicle, as contained in his police report, was totally wrong. Attorney Noonan presented testimony from witnesses showing that the Defendant consumed wine at her home, was not intoxicated, and left the home to pick up her niece at work in Stoughton when she was pulled over and arrested.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets a Not Guilty on OUI-Liquor charge.


October 21, 2014
Commonwealth v. N.B.
Brockton District Court

OUI DRUGS: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE
CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE DRUG LAW: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE
FAILURE TO STOP FOR POLICE: DISMISSED w/ PREJUDICE

Client, 55 year-old, professional van driver, was arrested and charged with OUI (drugs) and other charges stemming from an incident on February 16, 2012. A State Trooper observed the Defendant’s vehicle speeding in Brockton and attempted to pull him over for Speeding. A total of three state police cruisers pursued the Defendant’s vehicle in an effort to effectuate a motor vehicle stop. Eventually, one police cruiser boxed Defendant’s vehicle in. The state trooper removed Defendant from the driver’s seat. The Trooper detected a strong odor of alcohol on the Defendant and observed that the Defendant had urinated in his pants. Defendant’s speech was slurred and his eyes were glassy and bloodshot. The Defendant admitted to consuming vodka or schnapps. Defendant stated that he ingested Xanax, Percocet, and Vicodin in combination with the vodka / schnapps. Police found syringes loaded with Heroin, burn spoons, glass pipes, and soaked cotton swabs in the vehicle. Defendant was administered and failed the HGN test, Hand Eye Coordination Test, Alphabet Test, One-Leg Stand, and Nine Step Walk and Turn. For 28 years, Defendant was employed as a professional van driver transporting elderly and disabled people. After his arrest, his employer laid him off and Defendant remained out of work during the pendency of his case. Defendant collected unemployment, went on assistance, and collected food stamps.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan dismissed all charges “with prejudice,” which means that the prosecution can never pursue the charges again, and the client is able to return to work.


March 20, 2013
Commonwealth v. A.F. 
Somerville District Court

OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE: NOT GUILTY

Client, 31-year-old teacher and high school basketball coach, was charged with Operating under the Influence and Operating to Endanger stemming from a three-car crash in which the Defendant lost control of his vehicle and struck two parked cars. Defendant admitted to consuming “mixed drinks” and failed all field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully moved for a required finding of not guilty after establishing that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden of proving that the Defendant was the operator of the motor vehicle in question. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan stated that the evidence showed two possible operators of the vehicle. When the police arrived, Defendant was standing next to the passenger side of the vehicle. The other occupant was being assisted by ambulance. The Commonwealth failed to present any evidence as to the registered owner of the vehicle.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s Motion for Required Finding of Not Guilty is allowed and client is acquitted and avoids losing his job as a school teacher.


January 14, 2013
Commonwealth v. C.B.     
Wrentham District Court  Dedham District Court

OUI (4th Offense): REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR 2ND OFFENSE /  NO JAIL TIME

Client, 42 year-old photographer, was charged with Operating under the Influence (third offense) and Operating under the Influence (fourth offense). Defendant had two prior convictions for OUI in South Carolina and Georgia. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in attacking the validity of the prior out-of-state convictions thereby reducing both Massachusetts cases to misdemeanor second offenses. Both misdemeanor second offense cases were consolidated into one probationary sentence and the Defendant did not have to serve any jail time. Because the offenses were reduced to misdemeanors, Defendant was able to return home to California.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan reduces fourth offense OUI to second offense OUI, saving his client a minimum mandatory jail sentence of one-year.


August 23, 2012                                    
Commonwealth v. R.R.
Dedham District Court

OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE: DISMISSED upon MOTION
NEGLIGENT OPERATION: DISMISSED upon MOTION

Defendant was traveling on a secluded country road when he lost control of his pickup truck and crashed into a stone wall. Defendant admitted to drinking six Heineken beers at a bar and he failed all field sobriety tests. In pretrial proceedings, Attorney Noonan obtained a court-order for the prosecution to provide him with the booking video of his arrest and his color booking photo. The first time the case was scheduled for trial, Attorney Noonan moved to dismiss because the prosecution did not provide him with the booking video or booking photo. The judge continued the trial to give the prosecution another opportunity to provide defense counsel with the discovery. Attorney Noonan subpoenaed the officer responsible for maintaining the booking videos and booking photos to appear at trial. At the second trial date, the prosecution did not provide the discovery to the Defendant. In his Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Noonan argued that the criminal complaints must be dismissed because the Commonwealth lost or destroyed exculpatory evidence by willfully disobeying court orders and dodging the subpoena.

Result: Attorney Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and all charges were dismissed outright by the judge.


November 25, 2011                                     
Commonwealth v. J.H.
Brockton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Client, 24 year-old engineer with no criminal record, was charged with operating under the influence and negligent operation stemming from a rollover accident on Route 24 South in which the Defendant drove off the highway and crashed into unoccupied construction trucks and equipment, causing serious property damage. A State Trooper arrived on the scene and observed that the Defendant smelled like alcohol, had slurred speech, had glassy / bloodshot eyes, and was unsteady on his feet.  At a Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully dismissed the case, arguing that there was insufficient evidence that the Defendant was impaired by alcohol.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan gets OUI-Liquor charge dismissed against engineer with no criminal record.


July 26, 2011
Commonwealth v. R.K.
Dedham District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: DISMISSED

A State Trooper observed the Defendant speeding on Route 95 and clocked his speed at 82 mph. The Trooper observed the vehicle weaving and swerving and initiated a motor vehicle stop. The Trooper had to sound his air horn several times, sound his siren several times, and use his PA system several times to get the Defendant to pull over. The trooper detected an odor of alcohol and observed that the defendant’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot and that his speech was slurred and thick-tongued. The Defendant repeated the same number three times on the counting test. Defendant consented to a breathalyzer test and registered a blood alcohol content of 0.11. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan filed discovery motions to obtain all periodic testing and maintenance logs for the breath test machine because the Defendant’s first attempt at the breath test was terminated because the machine registered an “interference.” The case was scheduled for trial four times and Attorney Noonan appeared ready for trial each time. On the last trial date, Attorney Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss on the basis that the Commonwealth failed to comply with court orders to provide the Defendant with the breathalyzer discovery, which was exculpatory because the BT machine malfunctioned during the Defendant’s first attempt to provide a sample.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets OUI-Liquor charge dismissed against business executive.


April 7, 2011
Commonwealth v. J.D. 
Brockton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: DISMISSED
NEGLIGENT OPERATION: DISMISSED
DISTURBING THE PEACE: DISMISSED

A civilian witness called the Whitman Police to report a motor vehicle accident in which he was struck by a purple Jeep and two men fled on foot. One suspect was described as wearing a white shirt and the other suspect was described as wearing an orange shirt. Moments later, a male party (co-defendant) approached the scene on foot and told police that he was riding as a passenger in the Jeep. Later, a K-9 located the Defendant in the woods approximately 100 feet away. The co-defendant pled Guilty to Witness Intimidation. The defense was premised on the argument that the Commonwealth would be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant (and not the co-defendant) was the operator of the purple Jeep. See Commonwealth v. Leonard, 401 Mass. 470 (1988). On April 7, 2011, the case was scheduled for trial and Attorney Gerald J. Noonan appeared ready. The Commonwealth requested a continuance because the eyewitness failed to appear. Attorney Noonan objected to the continuance and moved for dismissal.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets all charges, including OUI-Liquor, dismissed against sheet metal worker. 


December 17, 2009
Commonwealth v. K.H.
Plymouth District Court

OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE: DISMISSED

On October 23, 2008, Defendant was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which his vehicle struck a telephone pole and he was taken by ambulance to the emergency room. Defendant was not placed under arrest or charged with a crime. On January 14, 2009, a criminal complaint issued against the Defendant for OUI-Liquor. On December 17, 2009, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued a Motion to Dismiss the criminal complaints because his client was denied the opportunity to appear at a clerk-magistrate’s hearing and to challenge the probable cause needed to charge him with the offense. Attorney Noonan argued that the police report contained insufficient probable cause that the defendant was under the influence.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed and the criminal complaint was dismissed. The Commonwealth decided not to pursue the charges after the criminal complaint was dismissed.


June 16, 2009
Commonwealth v. J.C.
Brockton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (second offense): NOT GUILTY

On June 1, 2008, police were dispatched for a caller reporting an erratic operator. The caller was actually following the Defendant while reporting the information to police. The officer followed the Defendant’s vehicle and observed her cross the yellow center line. Defendant did not pull over right away but continued traveling for another fifty yards before finally pulling over to the very edge of the roadway. The officer asked Defendant to exit the vehicle to perform field sobriety tests. She stated that she had been coming from a wedding and denied drinking any alcohol. The officer detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from her breathe and he observed that her eyes were bloodshot. Defendant exited the vehicle in bare-feet stating that she had been wearing heels all night. Defendant failed all field sobriety tests, which included the one-legged stand and nine-step walk and turn. During booking, the officer stated that she was unsteady on her feet, that she walked into a wall, and that she almost fell into the hallway when being escorted to her cell. The officer stated that the Defendant’s face was flush, that her eyes were glassy and bloodshot, and that she appeared to be confused. Three months prior to her arrest, Defendant was convicted of OUI-Liquor having registered a blood alcohol content of .22, making this a second offense.  At trial, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan called a mechanic to testify. The mechanic had inspected and test-driven the Defendant’s vehicle and he testified that the vehicle would drift in a certain direction because the alignment was bad. Attorney Noonan called a witness who testified that he attended the wedding with the Defendant prior to the arrest and that he sat at the same table with her during the wedding. The witness testified that he did not observe the Defendant consume any alcohol at the wedding and that she appeared sober at the wedding. Finally, Attorney Noonan impeached the officer by introducing Defendant’s color booking photo, which showed that her eyes were clear and face was normal in contradiction to the officer’s testimony that her face was flush and that her eyes were glassy and bloodshot.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Not Guilty verdict on second offense OUI saving his client from possible 60 days in jail and a three-year suspension of driver’s license.


January 27, 2009
Commonwealth v. D.R.
Brighton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: NOT GUILTY

On November 29, 2006, Boston Police officers heard a vehicle spinning its tires and rapidly accelerating on Harvard Ave. in Brighton. The officers then stopped Defendant’s vehicle on Harvard Ave. The officer, in fear for his safety, immediately removed the operator from the vehicle. Immediately, the officer detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from the operator and the officer observed that his eyes were extremely bloodshot and glassy. Defendant’s speech was slurred and he was unsteady on his feet. Defendant failed all four field sobriety tests, which included the nine step walk and turn, the one-legged stand, the counting test, and the alphabet test. At the police station, Defendant took a breathalyzer test and registered a blood alcohol content of 0.11.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Not Guilty on OUI-Liquor charge against defendant with 0.11 blood alcohol content.


March 20, 2008
Commonwealth v. R.J.
Hingham District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (0.19 BAC) NOT GUILTY

Hanover Police were dispatched to a motor vehicle accident in which a motor vehicle had ended up in a wooded area. Upon arrival, the police officer observed a red pick-up truck in the woods approximately 15-feet off the roadway. The motor vehicle was damaged and hit several branches. There was no one inside the vehicle. The officer observed approximately 100 feet of skid marks leading up to the motor vehicle. While checking the area for the operator, Defendant approached the police officer. The officer asked who he was to which the Defendant replied, “It’s my truck.” The officer asked him if he was driving the truck and the Defendant replied, “Yeah, I don’t know what the fuck happened.” The officer observed that the Defendant had bloodshot eyes and smelled of alcohol. Defendant stated to the officer, “I’m fucked.” Defendant failed all field sobriety tests, which included the alphabet test, the counting test, the nine step heel-to-toe test, and the one-legged stand. Back at the police station, Defendant agreed to take a breath test and his blood alcohol content was 0.19, more than double the legal limit. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan acquitted his client of OUI-Liquor by attacking the Commonwealth’s case by showing that the Commonwealth failed to present sufficient evidence to show that the Defendant was the “operator” of the motor vehicle.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Not Guilty on OUI-Liquor charge where defendant had a blood alcohol content of 0.19.


June 1, 2007
Commonwealth v. J.G.
Lawrence District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: NOT GUILTY

A State Trooper observed the Defendant passed his police cruiser on Route 91 South traveling at a high rate of speed in excess of 100 mph. The Trooper pursued the Defendant’s vehicle reaching speeds in excess of 100 mph and at one point clocked his speed at 110 mph. The Trooper detected an odor of alcohol and a faint odor of burnt marijuana emitting from the Defendant’s vehicle. The Trooper observed that the Defendant’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot that his speech was slurred and that he appeared lethargic. Defendant accused the Trooper of racially profiling him and being trigger happy. Defendant admitted to consuming two beers. Defendant failed the alphabet test. On the one-legged stand, Defendant raised his leg above the requested six-inches to thigh level because she wanted to “do extra.” However, the Trooper noted that he counted to seven and put his foot down on the ground. Defendant failed the finger-to-nose test on five attempts. At the police station, Defendant was argumentative and uncooperative. He immediately stated, “I have to piss.” He accused the Trooper of having a quota. He refused to tell the Trooper that phone number and the name of the person he called from the police station. During booking, Defendant unbuttoned his shirt, got on his knees, and raised his arms saying. “I’ll get naked, whatever you want me to do.” Defendant then fell asleep in his cell.

Result: After a three-day trial in the Lawrence District Court, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Not Guilty verdict for his client.


June 15, 2005
Commonwealth v. K.B.
Brockton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: DISMISSED

Client, a senior at Stonehill College, was arrested and charged with Operating under the Influence of Liquor. On March 25, 2005, Bridgewater Police were dispatched for a report of a suspicious vehicle in a driveway. Upon arrival, Police observed the vehicle backing out of the driveway. Police followed the vehicle, which pulled forward and stopped. The officer approached the vehicle and knocked on the window. The officer asked the operator to turn down the radio but the operator turned off the ignition. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol coming from the operator’s breath, that his speech was slurred, and that his eyes were glassy. Defendant could not locate his registration. The Defendant failed the alphabet test. The officer asked the Defendant to touch his left index finger to his nose but the Defendant bent over and touched his toes. The Defendant could not touch the tip of his nose with his index finger. Finally, the Defendant failed the nine-step walk and turn after several attempts. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan successfully dismissed the case and no criminal complaint issued against his client and Attorney Gerald J. Noonan obtained an order restoring the Defendant’s driver’s license.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets OUI-Liquor charge dismissed against college student and his driver’s license restored.


January 9, 2005
Commonwealth v. R.M.
Taunton District Court

OUI-LIQUOR: NOT GUILTY
NEGLIGENTY OPERATION: NOT GUILTY
LEAVING SCENE PROPERTY DAMAGE:    NOT GUILTY

Easton Police responded to a hit-and-run accident. Stonehill students were traveling in a vehicle and attempted to make a left-hand turn into the campus entrance. Defendant’s vehicle attempted to pass the Stonehill vehicle on the left, as it was making the left-hand turn. Defendant’s vehicle smashed into the driver’s side of the Stonehill vehicle then fled the scene pulling into a parking lot approximately one-half mile down the road.  The Stonehill student called 911 and gave the police the Defendant’s registration. An SUV traveling behind the Stonehill vehicle followed the Defendant’s vehicle to the parking lot. Upon arrival, officers observed two males attempting to change the front passenger side tire of the vehicle, which had been extensively damaged from a collision. Defendant admitted to police that he was the operator and that he had gotten into and accident and was changing the tire. After three requests, Defendant was able to produce his license and registration. Defendant admitted to having two beers at the Union Villa Bar. Defendant then changed is story by saying that he had been at Owen O’Leary’s and had two beers and a shot of Vodka. Defendant stated that he had been drinking “Bud” and then stated that he had been drinking “draft.” Officers detected an odor of alcohol coming from the Defendant’s breath. Officers observed that his eyes were glassy and bloodshot and that his speech was thick and slurred. After three attempts, Defendant failed the alphabet test. After two attempts, Defendant failed the one-legged stand. Lastly, Defendant failed the nine step walk-and-turn. An identified witness informed police that he observed one of the male’s throw a cooler over the wooden fence. A search of the backseat found ice and two cold Michelob beers. During the booking process, Defendant became argumentative and confrontational, which was captured on videotape. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan acquitted his client on all charges by arguing that the Commonwealth failed to sustain its burden of proof on an essential element of the crime; that the Defendant (and no one else) was the “operator” of the motor vehicle.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets Not Guilty verdicts on all charges, including OUI-Liquor, against Navy man.


September 12, 2003
Commonwealth v. K.C.
Wrentham District Court

OUI-LIQUOR (second offense): NOLLE PROSEQUI

Defendant was arrested for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol. Defendant was given a breath test to determine his blood alcohol content. The results of the breath test showed that the defendant’s blood alcohol content was in excess of the legal limit. The Commonwealth alleged that the arresting officer administered the breath test. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan interviewed the arresting officer and the arresting officer informed him that he did not administer the breath test to the defendant. The arresting officer informed Attorney Noonan that a different officer administered the breath test. Attorney Noonan discovered that the other officer was not certified to administer breath tests. Later, the arresting officer retracted his statement and said that he was actually the one who administered the breath test. Attorney Noonan filed a Motion to Suppress the Results of the Breath Test and subpoenaed the Shift Supervisor on duty at the time of the defendant’s breath test. As a shift supervisor, this sergeant would be in a position to testify as to which officer administered the breath test, as all arrests and prisoner bookings were run by him.

It was later learned that the supervising officer was placed on administrative leave and terminated by the police department. The District Attorney’s Office never informed Attorney Noonan that the shift supervisor had been terminated. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan subpoenaed the shift supervisor to appear at the Trial but the shift supervisor did not appear. Attorney Noonan learned that the Commonwealth instructed the shift supervisor not to appear to any trials or court proceedings in which he was involved because he was no longer employed by the police department. As a result, the supervising officer did not appear at trial even though he was subpoenaed by Attorney Noonan.

Result: At trial, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan moved to dismiss the charges arguing: the Commonwealth failed to comply with discovery orders; the Commonwealth violated his client’s right to a speedy trial, and key witnesses failed to appear pursuant to Attorney Noonan’s subpoenas. In the alternative, Attorney Noonan moved to exclude the results of the breath test because the evidence showed that the officer who administered the breath test was not properly certified. At trial, the Commonwealth filed a Nolle Prosequi on all the charges.

Save

Save

Related posts: