1. If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Being Charged with Carrying on Expired LTC

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by inkdesigner, Dec 7, 2018.

  1. kingfisher

    kingfisher

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,261
    Likes Received:
    321
    On its face, that's... words escape me. Did the two who were convicted at least possibly perpetrate the crime together?

    Hilarious!
     

  2. Fixxah

    Fixxah NES Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    26,610
    Likes Received:
    5,312
    Location:
    Norwood mostly.
    Better?
     
    MAJoe, RHJJ and Len-2A Training like this.
  3. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    A few years ago, the court discovered a problem with Melanie's law (OUI). The enhanced penalties for a 2nd offense kicked in if one was "Previously convicted or ordered to a program". But on the breathalyzer refusal, they forgot the "or ordered to a program" language. The RMV was routinely suspending a license for three years for people with a CWOF who refused a BT. (A CWOF is not a conviction, but to get the benefit, you must attend a court ordered program). One guy took it to the SJC where they held that, although it was clearly not what the legislature wanted, it was what they wrote, and ordered the RMV to stop suspending licenses for three years. The legislature quickly fixed their error.

    That would happen here if it wasn't gunz.
     
  4. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    Blowing under .08 doesn't mean you're not necessarily under the influence. From G.L. c90, §24 "If such evidence is that such percentage was five one-hundredths or less, there shall be a permissible inference that such defendant was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and he shall be released from custody forthwith"

    .05 or less is not under the influence. .08 or above is under the influence. Over .05 and under .08 could go either way.
     
    Talon3 and AHM like this.
  5. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    The DAs (at least in Worcester County) don't dismiss ANYTHING unless there's a deal on the table. SOMETIMES the judge will dismiss the charge if he can be convinced that the accusation doesn't fit the crime, but as often as not they will not.

    Case in point. Client (with LTC) charged with carrying a dangerous weapon, to wit: a spring assisted knife. I argued that (a) a spring assisted knife is not listed as one of the per se dangerous weapons (the same list that has the zoobow), (b) he was not alleged to be carrying it in a manner that made it dangerous, and (c) Chapter 269 Section 10 does not apply to someone with an LTC. The judge denied the motion, so now we're taking it to trial.

    "No person having in effect a license to carry firearms for any purpose, issued under section one hundred and thirty-one or section one hundred and thirty-one F of chapter one hundred and forty shall be deemed to be in violation of this section."
     
    AHM likes this.
  6. Rob Boudrie

    Rob Boudrie

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    31,881
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    True, but the court was quite clear - NOT meeting the standard for OUI of a vehicle does NOT mean one is not guilty of carry under the influence.
     
  7. swatgig

    swatgig NES Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,128
    Likes Received:
    2,163
    Location:
    Chained together with 999 of my associates at the
    I'm well aware of that, and told my guy to take the CWOF, because there is no standard for carrying under the influence. I also let the judge know that since there is no standard, I advised my client to admit to sufficient facts, as he had admitted to consuming ONE beer. He got back his LTC, but who knows what will happen when his chief retires.
     
  8. Rob Boudrie

    Rob Boudrie

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    31,881
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    While the advice of STFU is generally good, it can lead to the conclusion that anyone with a bar card you hire is your personal Allstate. Not so - if you hire an attorney not specifically versed in gun law and rely on him/her for advice, decisions or strategy you can get screwed. Remember, the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel is bad representation that goes beyond what a "normal fallible lawyer" would provide.
     
  9. AHM

    AHM NES Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,899
    Likes Received:
    1,259
    The contrapositive of a case whose epic win I recall being laid at the feet of Abraham Lincoln.
    (Two brothers accused of solo murder, each accuses the other;
    Lincoln convinces the jury that since they both couldn't have done it,
    there was reasonable doubt in the case of each, and so they had to acquit both.
    Except that I can't find a fitting case of Lincoln's...).

    Poor choice of words.
    I still remember my parents' gobsmackage upon hearing
    that Allstate was a particularly bad company to be insured by.
     
  10. namedpipes

    namedpipes NES Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    27,876
    Likes Received:
    9,346
    Location:
    PREM
    Two very good (meaning very expensive) defense lawyers could have each gotten their clients free by pointing to the reasonable doubt that someone else was currently being prosecuted for the same murder. Incidentally, was either one of them actually innocent?

    I believe Lt. Schrodinger either works or does not work for the Worcester Police Department, not Boston.

    Are any of you guys up to the task of researching if there is in fact a police officer named Schrodinger working ANYWHERE in the US?
     
  11. Rob Boudrie

    Rob Boudrie

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    31,881
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    Unless, of course, the judge determines that testimony irrelevant and does not allow counsel to admit it. No idea if anyone was innocent or guilty in actuality.
     
  12. Drix

    Drix

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    2,158
    Likes Received:
    954
    Location:
    Merrimack Valley
    On the bright side however, currently breathalyzers are a no go in court.
     

Share This Page