Worcester - 3 Arrested on Drug / Gun Charges

[Nick Leduc]

Looks like they were charged with anything and everything they possibly could be charged with.

3 arrested on drug, gun charges in Worcester

WORCESTER — A motor-vehicle stop on Southbridge Street Tuesday evening led to the arrest of three men on gun and drug charges, state police announced Wednesday.

Matthew Miller, 26, of Worcester, was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, carrying a loaded large-capacity firearm, possession of a large capacity feeding device, carrying a loaded firearm, possession of a large capacity firearm in the commission of a felony, possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card, conspiracy to violate the drug law, being present where heroin is kept, carrying a firearm while intoxicated, driving under the influence of drugs, driving without a license in possession, and a marked lanes violation.

Michael Iacovone, 47, of Worcester was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, carrying a loaded large-capacity firearm, possession of a large-capacity feeding device, carrying a loaded firearm, possession of a large-capacity firearm in the commission of a felony, possession of ammunition without a firearms identification card, trafficking in heroin, possession with intent to distribute Class A heroin, possession of a Class B substance subsequent offense, possession of an open container of marijuana in a motor vehicle, and a seat belt violation.

James Toohil, 52, of Worcester, was charged with possession of a Class A substance subsequent offense, and a seatbelt violation.

Troopers were on patrol on Southbridge Street when they reported stopping a 2006 Nissan Altima for a motor-vehicle violation, state police said in a press release. Police said they noticed the front-seat passenger, Mr. Iacovone, “make quick, furtive movements, causing them concern for their safety.” Troopers said they determined the driver, Mr. Miller, was driving without a license and under the influence of drugs. The two passengers, Mr. Iacovone and Mr. Toohil, had a substance believed to be heroin, police reported. Troopers reported Mr. Iacovone was also in possession of substances believed to be cocaine and marijuana. Troopers also reported finding a loaded .40-caliber Glock model 27 with two high-capacity magazines in the vehicle.

Mr. Miller and Mr. Iacovone were held on $5,000 and $100,000 bail, respectively, pending their arraignment in Worcester District Court Wednesday. Mr. Toohil was released on personal recognizance

 

[hminsky]

"open container of marijuana". That's a new one.

 

[MGnoob]

1 gun and two mags...i wonder if they are just charging both with gun crimes because everyone is going plead guilty because they are already PP, and won't actual do any jail time anyway...
Ya i wonder /sarcasm

 

[Nick Leduc]

"open container of marijuana". That's a new one.

1. General Laws

1. Part I ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT

1. Title XV REGULATION OF TRADE

1. Chapter 94G REGULATION OF THE USE AND DISTRIBUTION OF MARIJUANA NOT MEDICALLY PRESCRIBED

1. Section 13 Penalties
2. Section 13

(d) Possession of marijuana in motor vehicles. No person shall, upon any way or in any place to which the public has a right of access, or upon any way or in any place to which members of the public have access as invitees or licensees, possess an open container of marijuana or marijuana products in the passenger area of any motor vehicle. A person who violates this subjection shall be punished by a civil penalty of not more than $500. For purposes of this section, "open container'' shall mean that the package containing marijuana or marijuana products has its seal broken or from which the contents have been partially removed or consumed and "passenger area'' shall mean the area designed to seat the driver and passengers while the motor vehicle is in operation and any area that is readily accessible to the driver or passenger while in a seated position; provided however that the passenger area shall not include a motor vehicle's trunk, locked glove compartment or the living quarters of a house coach or house trailer, or if a motor vehicle is not equipped with a trunk, the area behind the last upright seat or an area not normally occupied by the driver or passenger.

I have seen a few local PDs put out warnings to the public that this is a thing and they are writing tickets for it. It was passed with the bill when marijuana became legal.

 

[oldguy68]

Not legal firearm owners.
Nothing to see here!

In future news..
The DA that is hard on legal firearm owners decided once again not to prosecute the firearm charges for yet another felon!
Call me shocked!

 

[Enzo]

Isn’t the typical mag for a G27 ten rounds? High capacity?...

 

[MGnoob]

10 rds does seem kinda high, why do you need 10 rds to hunt?

 

[ScottS]

Matthew Miller, 26, of Worcester, was charged with...and a marked lanes violation.

Michael Iacovone, 47, of Worcester was charged with... and a seat belt violation.

James Toohil, 52, of Worcester, was charged with...and a seatbelt violation.

Thank God we’re getting the important charges in there...

 

[swatgig]

possession of a large-capacity firearm in the commission of a felony

Count 1: Possession of a large-capacity firearm without a license.
Count 2: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 1.
Count 3: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 2.
Count 4: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 3.
Count 5: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 4.
Count 6: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 5.
Count 7: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 6.
Count 8: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 7.
Count 9: Possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. To wit: Count 8.
.
.
.

 

[white feather]

Damn, that "marked lanes violation" is like a gateway drug... it always leads to bigger and bigger violations. When will they ever learn to stay in their own damned lane?

 

[amm5061]

Shit, meet wall. What's going to stick? Probably none of it, they're protected felons already.

 

[JayMcB]

Marked lane violation is copspeak for 'I want to go on a fishing expedition' so there's no poisoned fruit

 

[rocket500]

It's kind of like fishing. If you don't let some of the fish go eventually there will be no fish to catch. It's good sportsmanship!

 

[76Too]

Because...Worcester

 

[white feather]

Marked lane violation is copspeak for 'I want to go on a fishing expedition' so there's no poisoned fruit

I know. Drug dealers need dash cams, good lane discipline, and a good lawyer to question the reason they were stopped.

 

[ScottS]

I know. Drug dealers need dash cams, good lane discipline, and a good lawyer to question the reason they were stopped.

Or not to be drug dealers, I suppose.

 

[GM-GUY]

Damn, that "marked lanes violation" is like a gateway drug... it always leads to bigger and bigger violations. When will they ever learn to stay in their own damned lane?

and decline the search.

Of course, as was said earlier, already a PP - probably already out, will plead out, and back on the street. Wash, Rinse, Repeat

 

[Wrench75]

Isn’t the typical mag for a G27 ten rounds? High capacity?...

They probably had G22 mags. The compact glocks will accept the bags of their bigger brothers.

 

[fish]

Thank God we’re getting the important charges in there...

The seat belt violation is what gives the police the ability to ID the passengers.

 

[ScottS]

The seat belt violation is what gives the police the ability to ID the passengers.

All three had major offenses prior to being ID’d. #2 was carrying a weapon and heroin with intent to distribute. I’d say those trump “seat belt” in forcing an ID.

 

[MisterHappy]

10 rds does seem kinda high, why do you need 10 rds to hunt?

Depends on what (or who) you're hunting, I guess....

 

[fish]

All three had major offenses prior to being ID’d. #2 was carrying a weapon and heroin with intent to distribute. I’d say those trump “seat belt” in forcing an ID.

Generally, the police have no right to ID a passenger for a motor vehicle infraction. They are considered bystanders, not participants in the moving violation. Once the seat belt violation is observed, it opens the door to more scrutiny.

 

[Nick Leduc]

Generally, the police have no right to ID a passenger for a motor vehicle infraction. They are considered bystanders, not participants in the moving violation. Once the seat belt violation is observed, it opens the door to more scrutiny.

Years ago, I had a sick passenger in my car. Nasty cold, very phlegmy. During a traffic stop where I failed to used my turn signal which changing lanes, my passenger opened the window and coughed some grossness out. The officer jumped out of his car and demanded my passengers ID........

"Section 14. Whoever expectorates or spits upon any public sidewalk, or upon any place used exclusively or principally by pedestrians, or, except in receptacles provided for the purpose, in or upon any part of any city or town hall, any court house or court room, any public library or museum, any church or theatre, any lecture or music hall, any mill or factory, any hall of any tenement building occupied by five or more families, any school building, any ferry boat or steamboat, any railroad car or elevated railroad car, except a smoking car, any street railway car, any railroad or railway station or waiting room, or on any track, platform or sidewalk connected therewith, and included within the limits thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than twenty dollars."

 

[Enzo]

They probably had G22 mags. The compact glocks will accept the bags of their bigger brothers.

Usually you read where the mags have less rounds than you know they hold. I remember one story where the drug dealer had 3 rounds in the mag.

 

[ScottS]

Generally, the police have no right to ID a passenger for a motor vehicle infraction. They are considered bystanders, not participants in the moving violation. Once the seat belt violation is observed, it opens the door to more scrutiny.

You’re missing my point. #2 was carrying gun/mags/lots of heroin. They didn’t find that because they guy wasn’t wearing a seat belt.

 

[180 GRAIN FMJ]

You’re missing my point. #2 was carrying gun/mags/lots of heroin. They didn’t find that because they guy wasn’t wearing a seat belt.

I think it was this that gave them "probable cause" for the search:

Police said they noticed the front-seat passenger, Mr. Iacovone, “make quick, furtive movements, causing them concern for their safety.”

 

[fish]

You’re missing my point. #2 was carrying gun/mags/lots of heroin. They didn’t find that because they guy wasn’t wearing a seat belt.

If you are saying that it was in plain view, I agree. Otherwise, an officer does not have the latitude to search, pat frisk or even ID. Many cases are lost because an officer could not articulate a reason to interact with the passenger.

 

[fish]

I think it was this that gave them "probable cause" for the search:

Police said they noticed the front-seat passenger, Mr. Iacovone, “make quick, furtive movements, causing them concern for their safety.”

I agree. This allows removal and a pat frisk. At that point the passenger was toast. If the passenger sat still and didnt speak, it would not have been a legal search.

 

[EC1]

this is not their first go round with the police.

 

[ScottS]

If you are saying that it was in plain view, I agree. Otherwise, an officer does not have the latitude to search, pat frisk or even ID. Many cases are lost because an officer could not articulate a reason to interact with the passenger.

Unless you’re telling me a seatbelt violation equals probable cause to search somebody, I’m saying it was an irrelevant tack-on.