Case Results Firearms Offenses

CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED DUE TO AN INCIDENT WHERE HIS TEENAGE SON ACCESSED HIS FIREARM FROM AN UNLOCKED SAFE AND POSTED VIDEOS OF HIMSELF AND THE GUN ON SOCIAL MEDIA BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN CONVINCES THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO REINDTATE HIS LTC

Client, a Brockton resident, is a 54 year-old engineer and real estate agent with no criminal record whatsoever. The client and his wife (a certified nursing assistant) emigrated from Haiti and built a great life for their family in the United States. The police department suspended the client’s LTC due to an incident where his teenage son accessed his firearm from an unlocked safe and posted videos of himself posing with the gun on social media. The videos on social media were reported to the son’s school who, in turn, contacted the police department. As a result of this incident, the police department suspended the client’s License to Carry Firearms (LTC).

Result: The client contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan in an effort to persuade the police department to reinstate his LTC. The firearms licensing officer told Attorney Noonan that the client was extremely remorseful for the incident and took full responsibility for the incident. The firearms licensing officer was open to considering an LTC reinstatement based, in large part, on the client’s truthfulness about the incident and his genuine remorse for what happened. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that his client made a poor mistake but something like this would never happen again. He left the unloaded firearm out of his sight for only a few minutes, which resulted in this incident. The client immediately completed a course in firearm’s safety. The main reason why the officer was willing to entertain a potential reinstatement was the client’s genuineness and truthfulness in speaking with police about the incident, his sincere expression of remorse, and his willingness to correct the mistake. After negotiations, the client’s LTC was reinstated.

MBTA WORKER’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED AFTER CRIMINAL CHARGES FOR UNLAWFULLY CARRYING A FIREARM OUTSIDE HIS RESTRICTION BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS HIS LTC REINSTATED

The client has a License to Carry Firearms (“LTC”) with a restriction for target shooting purposes only. The client was criminally charged in Boston with unlawfully carrying a firearm outside his target shooting restriction. At 2:41 a.m., Boston Police were patrolling a high crime area, which had been the scene of recent shootings. Officers were suspicious that the Defendant’s vehicle and another vehicle were parked in close proximity to each other (in this high-crime area) and the vehicles took off in separate directions. Officers followed the Defendant’s vehicle and their suspicious increased because the vehicle’s windows were tinted and the license plate was obstructed by some plastic covering. Officers stopped the Defendant’s vehicle and asked him if he had a firearm in his possession. Defendant was truthful and stated that he had a firearm underneath his seat. His LTC was restricted to target shooting only and the police felt that the Defendant had possessed the firearm outside his restriction and charged him criminally. Following the criminal charge, the client’s LTC was suspended.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully petitioned the Police Department to reinstate his client’s LTC for the following reasons: First, the criminal charge was dismissed at a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing. He was only issued warnings for the civil infractions for the tinted windows and license plate obstruction. Second, Attorney Noonan presented evidence that his client was in that specific area in Boston because he was visiting his grandmother. The client was not doing anything suspicious. Third, the client had gone target shooting that day at the Braintree Rifle and Pistol Club with co-workers of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Fourth, Attorney Noonan presented strong character evidence. The client had no criminal record. He has been gainfully employed by the MBTA for six years. Several respectable members of the community offered letters attesting to the client’s character. Finally, the client completed a firearm’s safety course. After reviewing the totality of the evidence, the police department reinstated the client’s license to carry firearms.

AFTER HEARING, JUDGE ALLOWS ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN’S MOTION TO DISMISS TRESPASSING CHARGE BASED ON EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE DEFENSE THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD LAWFUL AUTHORITY TO BE ON THE PROPERTY. THE CASE WAS DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT MEANING THAT THE DEFENDANT (WHO IS NOT A U.S. CITIZEN) WILL HAVE NO RECORD.

 Brockton Police responded to the parking lot of an apartment complex in response to 911 calls reporting that a vehicle in the parking lot was firing gunshots. Upon arrival, Police found the Defendant in the parking lot, standing by his vehicle. The Police demanded that the Defendant leave the property, or they would arrest him for Trespassing. According to police, Defendant refused law enforcement’s demands to leave the property immediately. Defendant was charged with criminal Trespassing (G.L. c. 266, §120). Defendant was not a U.S. citizen. Certain criminal convictions against non-U.S. citizens may result in deportation.

Result: Upon hiring Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, Attorney Noonan conducted an immediate investigation and learned that the Defendant’s cousin, who lived in the apartment complex, had given him permission to be on the property. Attorney Noonan provided the District Attorney’s Office with an Affidavit from the cousin stating that he had given the Defendant permission to be on the property. As a result, Defendant did not commit a Trespass because he had lawful authority to be on the property. Moreover, Attorney Noonan argued that there was no probable cause for the offense because the police had no authority to demand that the Defendant leave the property, because the police did not have lawful control over the premises, as they were not residents of the apartment complex. Attorney Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed, and the case was dismissed prior to arraignment, meaning that the Defendant (who is not a U.S. citizen) will have no record as a result of this case.

CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED BY BOSTON POLICE FOR BEING UNCOOPERATIVE DURING A POLICE INVESTIGATION, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS HIS LTC REINSTATED.

Client is a 30 year-old Boston man with no record of criminal convictions. He was issued a License to Carry Firearms (LTC) by the Boston Police. Client was employed in armed security, which required him to have an LTC. In 2020, client was the victim of a drive-by shooting in Hyde Park where he was shot in the leg. While in the hospital, police proceeded to question him, but the officer found that the client was being “uncooperative.” As a result, Boston Police suspended his LTC alleging that he was an “unsuitable person” to be issued an LTC because he was uncooperative with the police.

Result: The client’s livelihood depended on him having an LTC. Because his LTC was denied, he lost his job in armed security and was unemployed. The client’s career in armed security seemed bleak because his LTC was suspended. Immediately, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Complaint in the Boston Municipal Court seeking judicial review and appealing the decision of the Boston Police in suspending his LTC. Attorney Noonan argued that: There is no reasonable nexus between the Plaintiff’s lack of cooperation with police and a risk to public safety – and the Plaintiff’s lack of cooperation with police was not reasonably related to the statute’s goal of keeping firearms out of the hands of persons who would cause a risk to public safety. Shortly after the filing of the Complaint and the Appeal, the Boston Police rightly decided to reinstate the client’s LTC. Now the client can return to work in armed security.

Hingham District Court

DA’S OFFICE DROPS FELONY CASE AGAINST HANOVER MAN FOR POSSESSION OF EXPLOSIVE DEVICE AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PRESENTS PROOF THAT THE DEVICE DID NOT CONTAIN ANY EXPLOSIVE MATERIAL.

 Hanover Police were called to the Defendant’s residence after his wife reported that the Defendant was intoxicated and making threats to commit suicide. Upon arrival, police observed that the Defendant had been consuming alcohol, and the Defendant confirmed that he had made suicidal threats. Police sectioned the Defendant and had him involuntarily committed due to substance abuse and mental health issues. After his arrest, Police seized firearms and ammunition from his residence. Police noticed a hand-grenade, and immediately contacted the Bomb Squad who believed that the grenade was a live explosive and contained explosive material. A K-9 alerted to the grenade as containing explosives. The Bomb Squad detonated and exploded the grenade. As a result, Defendant was charged with Possession of an Incendiary Device (G.L. c. 266, §102(c)), which carries a potential State Prison sentence of not less than five (5) years.

Result:  Defendant had purchased the grenade on gunbroker.com. The grenade was shipped to him by a company in Florida. Our investigator contacted the vendor who sold the grenade to the Defendant. The vendor stated that these grenades were shipped to them from Poland, and the grenades were screened by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs before the grenades entered the U.S. The vendor stated that the grenades were dummy grenades used by law enforcement for training purposes. The vendor stated that the grenades typically have a white stripe, which indicates that it is a dummy grenade used by law enforcement for teaching purposes. Photographs of the Defendant’s grenade showed that it had a white stripe. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan moved to dismiss the criminal complaint, which was denied by the Judge. Attorney Noonan made several requests to the District Attorney’s Office to dismiss the case, and provided proof from the vendor that the grenade was not live. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the Defendant was a collector of old military memorabilia, which he used to decorate his home office. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant purchased the grenade, believing it was fake, to decorate his home office, which contained many old military collectables. After three requests, the District Attorney’s Office finally dismissed the case.

Plymouth District Court

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF ASSAULT WEAPON:             DISMISSED

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF ASSAULT WEAPON:             DISMISSED

THREATS TO COMMIT MURDER:                                           DISMISSED

IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM:                                  GUILTY, PROBATION

Defendant, a Plymouth resident and commercial lobsterman, was a front seat passenger in a car driven by his wife. Defendant was extremely intoxicated and threatened to blow his wife’s brains out. Defendant proceeded to punch and elbow the passenger side window causing the glass to shatter. Defendant then jumped out of the moving vehicle. His wife called the police. Upon arrival to the scene of the incident, police found the Defendant lying on the ground, covered in vomit, and intoxicated. Defendant was transported to the emergency room. Laboratory tests showed the presence of alcohol and drugs. Defendant placed in a secured psychiatric unit of the hospital. Because the Defendant had a License to Carry Firearms, police went to his residence to secure all his weapons. Police located an assault rifle. Modifications had been made to the rifle causing it to be an illegal assault weapon. Police also located a magazine which had been illegally modified causing it to be in an illegal feeding device for the assault weapon. The magazine’s pin had been removed and modified to hold 30 rounds of ammunition. Defendant was interviewed by police where he admitted to making the illegal modifications. When searching his house to seize all his firearms, police were unable to locate a firearm that had been registered to the Defendant. Police were eventually able to locate the missing firearm in a kitchen cabinet. This firearm was not properly stored. Defendant was charged by the Plymouth Police with two counts of illegal possession of an assault weapon pursuant to G.L. c. 140, §121, threats to commit murder pursuant to G.L. c. 275, §2, and Improper Storage of a Firearm pursuant to G.L. c. 140, §131L.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed motions to suppress key evidence in the case. First, Attorney Noonan sought to suppress the Defendant’s confession to committing the crimes on the grounds that his statements were not voluntary due to his alcohol and drug intoxication and psychiatric conditions. Second, Attorney Noonan sought to suppress the search of the Defendant’s home because his wife did not have legal authority to consent to the search and seizure of the Defendant’s personal property. Prior to litigating the motions to suppress, the Commonwealth offered to dismiss all charges except for the misdemeanor offense of Improper Storage of a Firearm to which the Defendant pled guilty and was placed on probation for one year.

Lowell District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PERSUADES THE COURT TO REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE LOWELL POLICE DEPARTMENT IN SUSPENDING THE CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS DUE TO ARRESTS FOR OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL AND CARRYING A FIREARM WHILE INTOXICATED.

Plaintiff had a valid License to Carry Firearms (LTC), which was suspended by the Lowell Police Department because he was arrested and charged with Operating under the Influence of Alcohol and Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated. According to the police department, the Plaintiff’s arrest made him an “unsuitable person” to possess a firearm. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed the decision of the police department to the Lowell District Court. The Police Department opposed the appeal and maintained that the Plaintiff was an unsuitable person.

Result: At the hearing in the Lowell District Court, the firearm licensing officer for the Lowell Police Department testified that the facts and circumstances of the Plaintiff’s arrest for OUI and Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated justified the decision to suspend his LTC. Attorney Noonan cross-examined the officer and pointed out that the Plaintiff was found not guilty of OUI and the firearm offense was dismissed by the prosecution. Nevertheless, the Lowell Police Department felt that the facts surrounding his arrest supported the decision to suspend his LTC. Attorney Noonan argued that the OUI should not be considered as a basis for a suspension because a jury, upon hearing the facts of the case, determined that the Plaintiff was not guilty of committing that offense. The Police Department maintained that the Defendant’s possession of a firearm while arrested for an OUI made him unsuitable. However, Attorney Noonan pointed out that the officer never investigated, or determined, why the prosecution decided to dismiss the firearm offense. The Court inferred that the firearm offense must have been a weak case if the prosecution decided not to prosecute him for that offense. Moreover, the licensing officer did not contact the Plaintiff to interview him to learn about outcome of the criminal case. The Court found that the Lowell Police Department should have conducted further inquiry before deciding to suspend the LTC. Attorney Noonan argued that it was unreasonable to suspend the LTC because the arrest occurred a long time ago, and the decision to suspend his license was not based on any recent evidence of unsuitability. Attorney Noonan had his client testify and he presented evidence of his suitability, which the Court credited. After the hearing, the Court reversed the decision to suspend the LTC and found that Attorney Noonan met his burden of proving that the decision by the Defendant was an abuse of discretion.

Hingham District Court

IN PERHAPS THE FIRST CASE DECIDED BY THE COURT IN MASSACHUSETTS, A DEFENDANT’S CRIMINAL RECORD FOR ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF EXPLOSIVES IS EXPUNGED AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THAT THE DEFENDANT’S CRIMINAL RECORD WAS CREATED AS A RESULT OF DEMONSTRABLE ERRORS BY LAW ENFORCEMENT WHO ERRONEOUSLY CONCLUDED THAT THE DEFENDANT POSSESSED A LIVE EXPLOSIVE DEVICE.

Expungement of a criminal record is extremely rare in Massachusetts. Recently, in October of 2018, the Legislature passed new legislation regarding the expungement of criminal records. G.L. c. 276, §100K states that the Court may order the expungement of a criminal record if the petitioner proves by clear and convincing evidence that the record was created as a result of demonstrable errors by law enforcement. As of the date of this case, Attorney Noonan has not found one reported case in Massachusetts in which a Court has expunged a criminal record due to errors committed by law enforcement.

Result: Police were called to the Defendant’s home after wife reported that the Defendant was intoxicated and making suicidal threats. Upon arrival, police sectioned the Defendant and had him transported to the hospital for an evaluation. As the Defendant was committed for mental illness and substance abuse, his License to Carry Firearms was suspended and the police went to his home to seize all his firearms. In the Defendant’s home, they recovered a hand grenade in a gun locker. The police incorrectly concluded that it was a live grenade. Defendant told the police that he purchased the grenade online and that the grenade was “fake.” A K-9 alerted to the presence of explosives in the grenade. The Bomb Squad inspected the grenade and erroneously concluded that it was a live grenade and contained explosive material. The Bomb Squad brought the grenade to a site where they detonated the grenade. According to the Bomb Squad, the grenade detonated as designed; another incorrect conclusion. It was the opinion of the Bomb Squad that this was a live grenade with explosive material in it. Laboratory testing showed that the grenade did not contain any explosives. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan had the evidence reviewed by an explosives expert, who formed an expert opinion that the Bomb Squad should have known that this was not a live grenade. The grenade had a distinctive marking, which indicated that it was a practice grenade and not live. The Bomb Squad could have scraped any explosive material out of the grenade and tested it. If the grenade did contain explosives, any explosive material would have a very distinct odor readily identifiable to an expert. The detonation of the grenade was unnecessary because a trained explosives expert would have been able to conclude that it was not a live grenade. When the Bomb Squad detonated the grenade, they introduced their own explosive material to cause the explosion and the grenade did not detonate, as designed. After the hearing, the Court found that Attorney Noonan met his burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that the Defendant was charged with this crime due to demonstrable errors committed by law enforcement.

Brockton District Court

Plymouth Superior Court

DISTRICT COURT JUDGE FINDS DEFENDANT DANGEROUS AND ORDERS HIM HELD IN JAIL UNTIL HIS TRIAL, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN APPEALS AND CONVINCES THE SUPERIOR COURT TO REVERSE THE FINDING OF THE DISTRICT COURT. ON APPEAL, DEFENDANT IS FOUND “NOT” DANGEROUS AND HE IS RELEASED ON $1,500 BAIL AND CONDITIONS.

Defendant, a Brockton resident, was a passenger in a vehicle. The vehicle was wanted for being involved in a drive-by shooting in Boston on January 2, 2021. State Police attempted to stop the vehicle in Boston, but the operator of the vehicle fled resulting in a car chase. The car chase went all the way from Boston into Brockton. The fleeing vehicle, traveling at a high rate of speed, crashed in Brockton. The vehicle was heavily damaged entrapping the Defendant, the passenger, and the co-defendant, operator. A team of officers ordered the defendant and co-defendant out of the vehicle by gunpoint. The co-defendant refused the officers’ commands, and police used a taser to subdue him. Police searched the glove compartment and found two handguns and large capacity ammunition. At the floor of the gas pedal, at the operator’s feet, police found a magazine. The co-defendant operator was wearing body armor underneath his jacket. Upon his arrest, Defendant had two warrants. Defendant was charged with: Resisting Arrest (G.L. c. 268, §32B), Carrying a Firearm without a License (G.L. c. 269, §10(a)), Carry a Loaded Firearm without a License, Possession of a Firearm without an FID Card (G.L. c. 269, §10(h)), Unlawful Possession of Large Capacity Feeding Device (G.L. c. 140, §131M), and Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L). The arrest was featured in the news.

Result: In the Brockton District Court, the prosecutor moved to have the Defendant held in jail until his trial on the grounds that he was “dangerous” and there were no conditions of release that would assure the safety of the public or to assure his appearance in court. A 58A Dangerousness Hearing was held in the Brockton District Court. At the hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan had three (3) witnesses prepared to testify. The witnesses would testify that the Defendant was not involved in the drive-by shooting in Boston on January 2, 2021 because the Defendant was at home in his father’s house in Brockton on that date. Essentially, Attorney Noonan had alibi evidence showing that the Defendant was not involved in the Boston shooting. Moreover, the witnesses would testify about the circumstances which led him to be a passenger in the vehicle on the night in question; and the proposed evidence suggested that the Defendant did not know the co-defendant-operator, and that the Defendant was a passenger in his car because he asked for a ride home. Lastly, Defendant’s father would testify that the Defendant has roots in the community and has lived with his father at the same address in Brockton for some period of time and the Defendant had a record of employment. If released, Defendant would continue to reside with his father, as he has always done. The District Court Judge did not allow Attorney Noonan’s witnesses to testify. The District Court Judge found that the prosecution proved that the Defendant was “dangerous,” and found that there were no conditions of release that would assure the safety of the public. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed to the Superior Court. A new 58A Dangerousness Hearing was held in the Superior Court. After the hearing, the Superior Court Judge found that the Defendant was “not” dangerous; effectively reversing the decision of the District Court. Further, the Superior Court found that there were conditions of release that would assure the safety of the public and his appearance in court; effectively reversing the decision of the District Court. The Superior Court released the Defendant from jail on $1,500 cash bail and the conditions recommended by Attorney Noonan. Attorney Noonan is now preparing the case for trial.

See https://whdh.com/news/police-2-arrested-guns-and-ballistic-vest-seized-after-chase-ends-in-brockton-crash/

See https://www.boston25news.com/news/brockton-pursuit-leads-multiple-charges-arrests/LG3NGKLSLJB7HKBZHNA3C4REZY/

See https://wbznewsradio.iheart.com/content/two-arrested-on-firearms-charges-after-fleeing-police-in-brockton/

See https://www.wcvb.com/article/three-police-departments-investigating-brockton-crash/35223556#

See https://www.masslive.com/boston/2021/01/2-men-accused-of-leading-massachusetts-state-police-on-chase-before-crashing-mercedes-into-pole-found-with-armored-vest-guns-ammo-authorities-say.html

See https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/car-crashes-in-brockton-after-police-chase/2281107/

CLIENT’S APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS DENIED FOR COMPLETING THE APPLICATION FORM UNTRUTHFULLY, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PERSUADES THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ISSUE HIS CLIENT AN LTC AFTER AN APPEAL.

The client is a 55 year-old professional truck driver. The client applied for a License to Carry Firearms, which was denied, because the police department determined that the client filled out the application form untruthfully. The police department alleged that the client was untruthful when answering questions about his criminal history. The police department alleged that the client failed to disclose criminal charges on his criminal record in his application.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed the police department’s denial of the client’s application for an LTC arguing that the client did not deliberately conceal his criminal record, but simply misunderstood the question. The client and his wife submitted statements explaining how they misunderstood the question when completing the application. During the appellate proceedings, through negotiations with legal counsel for the police department, the police department allowed the client to resubmit a new application and to disclose everything pertaining to his criminal record. The client resubmitted a new application and the police department issued him a License to Carry Firearms.

Chicopee District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL AND OBTAINS A COURT ORDER REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN SUSPENDING THE CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS FOR BEING AN UNSUITABLE PERSON.

The client was issued a Class A License to Carry Firearms without restrictions. The Chicopee Police Department suspended his LTC alleging that he was an unsuitable person to possess a license stemming from an incident in which the police were called to his residence. Upon arrival, the client was outside his residence, intoxicated, and he was about to operate his vehicle until police intervened. The client’s wife told the police that the client had been drinking at the casino, was intoxicated, and she was concerned about him driving. The client wanted to take his firearm and leave the house prior to the police being called. The police went into the client’s home to retrieve his firearm while the client remained outside. The firearm was kept in a locked safe. The wife escorted police to the gun safe, she unlocked the safe, and the police seized the firearm. The client’s wife, who did not have an LTC, knew the combination to the gun safe and she was able to access the firearm. The police department suspended his LTC claiming that he was an unsuitable person because his wife knew the combination to the gun safe, she was able to access his firearm, and she did not have a gun license, and the police department was concerned that the client was going to access his firearm while intoxicated and drive away while under the influence.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed an appeal in the Chicopee District Court disputing that his client was an unsuitable person. At the hearing, the Judge entered an order reversing the police department’s decision to suspend the LTC. The Court entered an order directing the police department to issue the client a Class A License to Carry Firearms without restrictions.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS REINSTATED DESPITE SUSPENSION FOR MULTIPLE INCIDENTS OF INTOXICATION.

The client is a 54 year-old automobile mechanic and owner of a pet grooming business. Since 1995, the client has been issued a License to Carry Firearms with no incidents. However, the police department suspended his LTC due to multiple incidents occurring at his home. In one incident, the police were called to his home due to a verbal argument with his wife wherein the client became upset and threw a glass fruit bowl. During this incident, the wife told the police that her husband had a drinking problem and he spouts off at the mouth when he’s been drinking. In a second incident, the police were called to the client’s house in response to domestic incident between the client and his adult son, which became physical. Upon arrival, police observed that the client was intoxicated. Witnesses in the home reported that the Defendant had been drinking all day and was causing problems leading to a heated exchange with his adult son. Based on the two incidents, the police department suspended the client’s LTC finding him to be an unsuitable person to possess a firearm.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed an appeal in the district court challenging the suspension. Attorney Noonan and legal counsel for the town engaged in extensive discussions, and Attorney Noonan provided additional information regarding his client’s background and the circumstances surrounding the incidents. Attorney Noonan presented evidence of his client’s successful substance abuse treatment. Through negotiations with town counsel, the police department reconsidered its decision and agreed to grant the client an LTC subject to the completion of certain conditions.

Ayer District Court

IN A CASE FEATURED IN LAWYER’S WEEKLY, THE NOONAN DEFENSE TEAM WINS MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AFTER PROVING THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE POLICE WITH VALID CONSENT TO SEARCH HER HOME BASED ON EXPERT TESTIMONY REGARDING THE DEFENDANT’S LANGUAGE BARRIERS.

Police were dispatched to the Weston Academy High School for a report that a student sent text messages to other students with pictures of a firearm while making suicidal statements. The student admitted to the police that he sent the text messages. The student told police that he took the firearm from his parents and sent pictures of the firearm to his friends. The student told the police that the firearm was currently located in his bedroom at his parents’ home in Westford. Police went to the student’s home where they encountered his mother (defendant) in the driveway. The police showed the mother a Consent to Search Form and they asked her to sign the form giving her consent to allow the police to search her home. After she signed the Consent Form, police searched the home and found the firearm in the son’s bedroom closet. The police proceeded to search the entire home where they recovered additional firearms and ammunition – none of which were properly stored or secured, including an AR-15 assault rifle. As a result of home search, the mother and father were charged with Possession of a Large Capacity Firearm and Possession of a Large Capacity Feeding Device pursuant to G.L. c. 269, §10(m), Possession of Ammunition without F.I.D. Card pursuant to G.L. c. 269, §10(h)(1) and Improper Storage of a Firearm pursuant to G.L. c. 140, §131L. The mother and father were not U.S. citizens and they faced possible deportation if convicted.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan and Attorney Gerald J. Noonan retained an expert witness specializing in English Language Proficiency. The expert interviewed the mother and performed a number of tests to determine her English proficiency, including her ability to speak, read, comprehend, and understand English. The parents were from China and moved to the U.S. four years prior to this incident. The expert determined that the mother met the definition of an LEP (Limited English Proficiency Person), which is defined as an individual who does not speak English as their primary language and who has limited ability to read, speak, write, or understand English. The expert administered a Basic English Skills Test and a Reading Comprehension Test and testified regarding the results. The expert went through the Consent to Search Form signed by the Defendant. The expert determined that the Defendant could not understand the majority of the words on the Consent Form, including: waive, search warrant, constitutional, right, refuse, and voluntary. The expert provided his expert opinion that the Defendant was incapable of reading and understanding the Consent Form. Through cross-examination of the police officer, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was able to establish that the officer did not read or explain the Consent Form to the Defendant, but merely asked her to sign the form and she acquiesced and signed the form, as she was told. The Court agreed with the Noonan Defense Team and determined that the Defendant was unable to provide valid consent for the search of her home, and the Court suppressed all evidence (all firearms and ammunition) obtained as a result of the search of the home. As a result of the suppressed evidence, the Commonwealth was forced to dismiss the case. The case was featured in a publication of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR CARRYING A DANGEROUS WEAPON ON SCHOOL GROUNDS AGAINST SHEET METAL WORKER DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.

Police received a report that an adult male, parked in a vehicle in the school parking lot, was in possession of a firearm. A teacher observed that the Defendant had a firearm tucked in his waistband, which became visible when the Defendant was rummaging through tools in the back of his truck. The Defendant was parked in the student pick-up line waiting to pick his daughter up from school. Police arrived and spoke with the Defendant, as he was parked in the student pick-up line. Defendant was polite and cooperative. Defendant had a valid License to Carry Firearms. He admitted to the police that he had a firearm on his person. He apologized and stated that he was unaware of the regulation around a firearm on school grounds. The police seized his firearm and filed an Application for Criminal Complaint against the Defendant for the offense of Carrying a Dangerous Weapon on School Grounds pursuant to G.L. c. 269, §10(j).

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaint dismissed at a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing resulting in no criminal charges against the client. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the Defendant had his firearm holstered on his waistband and he never intended to exit his vehicle, or walk on school grounds, while picking up his daughter at school. Defendant briefly exited his vehicle to rearrange tools in the back of his vehicle when the firearm on his waistband became visible. Defendant was extremely apologetic and cooperative. Attorney Noonan showed that this was a simple mistake with no criminal intentions. Attorney Noonan pointed out that his client is a 53 year-old man with no criminal record who has never been in any trouble in his life. For 34 years, he has worked as a union sheet metal worker. Attorney Noonan presented letters from several persons attesting to the Defendant’s character. After hearing Attorney Noonan’s evidence and arguments, the Clerk-Magistrate dismissed the criminal complaint and the client was never charged with a crime. Additionally, the client’s License to Carry Firearms was not suspended.

CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS SUSPENDED FOR IMPROPERLY STORING AND LOSING HIS FIREARM, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS BACK HIS CLIENT’S LTC.

The client is 46 years-old and a resident of Fall River. He married his high school sweetheart and they have two children. He works as a commercial truck driver. His LTC was suspended because he reported his firearm as missing. He stated that he brought his firearm with him to the bank, as he was withdrawing a large sum of money for a down payment on his home, and he left the firearm in his glove compartment while he was inside the bank. When he left the firearm inside the glove compartment, he affixed a lock on the firearm. He was in the process of moving and forgot that his firearm was in the glove compartment. When he went to retrieve his firearm from the glove compartment, he noticed that it was missing, and he contacted the police department to report the disappearance of his firearm. The police department suspended his LTC claiming that he failed to store his firearm properly as required by G.L. c. 140, §131L.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed the suspension of the LTC and presented evidence that his client stored his firearm in his glove compartment properly by using a “tamper-resistant mechanical lock or other safety device,” which is recognized as a proper means to secure a firearm under the statute (G.L. c. 140, §131L.) The client purchased a Ruger lock for his Ruger firearm. He used the Ruger lock to lock his firearm by removing the magazine and fitting the lock through the empty magazine and empty chamber. Attorney Noonan argued that the Ruger lock was sufficient because it rendered the firearm inoperable by an unauthorized user. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the firearm was outside the client’s control for a short period of time and he immediately reported it missing to the police as soon as he discovered its disappearance. Through negotiations with legal counsel for the police department, the suspension status was removed from the database.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS AGAINST U.S. POSTAL WORKER FOR THREATENING TO SHOOT HIS GIRLFRIEND’S FATHER DISMISSED AT A CLERK MAGISTRATE HEARING.

The parents of the Defendant’s girlfriend did not like him. The parents believed that the Defendant was abusive to their daughter. The parents claimed that the Defendant beat their daughter with a phone charger. The father went to the Defendant’s home to confront him. The father observed a firearm on the kitchen counter. The father alleged that the Defendant threatened to shoot him with the firearm on the kitchen counter. The father claimed that the Defendant threatened him should the father call the police. As a result, the police filed an Application for Criminal Complaint against the Defendant for two counts of Threats to Commit a Crime pursuant to G.L. c. 275, §2.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaints dismissed at the Clerk’s Hearing. The girlfriend’s parents wanted the Defendant charged with the crimes. Attorney Noonan presented evidence showing that the parents’ belief that the Defendant was abusive to their daughter was unfounded. Attorney Noonan presented evidence from the girlfriend that the Defendant was never abusive towards her – seriously undermining the abuse complaints by her parents. The parents had an axe to grind against the Defendant. They did not like him and they did not want him dating their daughter and they had a strong motive to have the Defendant charged with a crime. Attorney Noonan attacked the credibility of the parents, and showed that the Defendant never abused their daughter, contrary to their claims. After a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, the complaint was dismissed.

CHARGE OF IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST GOVERNMENT WORKER WITH NO CRIMINAL RECORD DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING UPON ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN’S EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION.

Fall River Police were dispatched for a report of a stolen firearm. Upon arrival, Police spoke with the Defendant, who was distraught, and he reported that his firearm was missing from his vehicle. Defendant stated that he had his firearm in his vehicle and placed it in his center console while doing Christmas shopping. When he returned home from shopping, he could not locate his firearm in his vehicle, so he reported the missing firearm to police. As a result, Defendant was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm pursuant to G.L. c. 140, §131L.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaint dismissed at the Clerk Magistrate Hearing. Defendant has no criminal record and he has been employed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for many years. Defendant and his wife are both social workers. Attorney Noonan presented six letters attesting to the Defendant’s character. The client has had a License to Carry Firearms for many years and has always been a responsible gun-owner. In this case, the Defendant made a mistake by leaving his firearm unattended in his vehicle for a short period of time, but he reported the disappearance of the firearm immediately upon his discovery. Although there may have been probable cause to support the criminal charge, the Clerk-Magistrate agreed with Attorney Noonan’s request to dismiss the charge.

A POLICE OFFICER’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED DUE TO INTOXICATION AND SUICIDAL THREATS, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS BACK HIS LTC.

The client was a police officer. His License to Carry Firearms (LTC) was suspended due to an incident wherein the client’s wife called the police to report that the client was intoxicated and threatened to shoot himself. Police located the client and brought him to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. As a result of this incident, the client’s LTC was suspended and he was forced to resign from his position as a full-time police officer. The LTC suspension, if upheld, would ruin his career in law enforcement. The client requested that the police department reinstate his LTC, but the police department denied the request and they were standing by their decision. The client contacted Attorney Patrick J. Noonan in hopes of getting his LTC back and resuming his career in law enforcement.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan started building a case to get his client’s LTC back. First, Attorney Noonan retained a highly reputable and credible psychiatrist to review all the records and to conduct an evaluation of the client. The psychiatrist reviewed all the pertinent records, including the police report concerning the incident resulting in the suspension and the medical records regarding the client’s hospitalization. After reviewing the records and evaluating the client, the psychiatrist formed an opinion that the client does not suffer from any substance abuse or mental health disorders and the client does not pose any danger is issued an LTC. Second, upon further investigation, the wife’s report to the police showed that the client did not actually threaten to shoot himself. Third, Attorney Noonan provided all information regarding the client’s personal background and career in law enforcement and security. After reviewing the materials provided by Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, the police department reconsidered its decision and issued the client an LTC. The client can now resume his career in law enforcement.

CLIENT’S APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS DENIED FOR BEING UNTRUTHFUL, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ISSUE HIS CLIENT AN LTC.

Client is a retired 65 years-old resident of Rehoboth. He applied for a License to Carry Firearms (LTC), which was denied because the police department determined that the client was untruthful about disclosing his criminal history in the application process.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed the denial in the District Court. Attorney Noonan presented evidence that the client did not deliberately conceal his criminal history. Rather, the client disclosed that he had been arrested in the past, but he could not recall the specifics about his prior criminal cases because they were very old. In particular, the client had been arrested for minor offenses; some offenses dating back over 40 years ago. Prior to submitting his application, the client did not obtain his criminal record making it very difficult to recall specific information about his old, prior criminal cases. After negotiations with legal counsel for the town, the police department reconsidered its decision and allowed the client to submit a new application. Attorney Noonan assisted the client in filling out the application to make sure the information was accurate. This time, we obtained his criminal record and accurately disclosed all the information regarding his prior cases. After reviewing the new application, the police department issued the client an LTC.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDS MAN WHO ACCIDENTALLY DISCHARGED HIS FIREARM WITH A STRAY BULLET STRIKING HIS NEIGHBOR’S HOUSE.

Police were dispatched to a residence in response to a report from a homeowner that a bullet was shot through the house and into the living room. The bullet was found inside the home on the floor of the living room. There was a bullet hole in the wall to the home. Police identified the bullet as a 9mm full metal jacket. Police interviewed the neighbor, the Defendant, who admitted that he accidentally discharged the firearm in his backyard. As a result, Defendant was charged with Discharging a Firearm within 500 Feet of a Dwelling (G.L. c. 269, §12E), Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L), and Defacing Property (G.L. c. 266, §126).

Result: At a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaints dismissed after a period of time, so long as the Defendant abides by certain conditions. Attorney Noonan argued that the client accidentally discharged the firearm while handling it inside the shed of his backyard. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan spoke with the victim-homeowner who was agreeable to Attorney Noonan’s proposed disposition. The client is a 64 year-old man with no criminal record and professional truck driver.

CLIENT’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED DUE TO AN ARREST FOR OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL AND A CONVICTION FOR NEGLIGENT OPERATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS THE CLIENT’S LTC REINSTATED. 

The client had a Class A License to Carry Firearms. The client was arrested for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol (OUI) and Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. The client traversed into a raised median, crashed into a light pole, dragging the light pole into the middle of an intersection. After his arrest, the police department suspended his LTC. The client hired the Noonan Law Offices to represent him on the criminal charges. After a trial, the client, represented by Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, was found not guilty of OUI, but he was found guilty of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. After the trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan contacted the police department to request the reinstatement of the client’s LTC. Attorney Noonan presented evidence from the trial showing that the client was not intoxicated. After considering the evidence, the police department decided to reinstate the client’s LTC.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDS MAN CHARGED WITH AIRPORT SECURITY VIOLATION WHERE A FIREARM WAS FOUND IN HIS TRAVEL BAG UPON INSPECTION.

The Defendant went to the airport with his wife and children. They were traveling out-of-state because his son was participating in a sporting competition. While security was checking his bag at the airport, they discovered a handgun. As a result, Defendant was charged with Airport Security Violation pursuant to G.L. c. 269, §12F(b).

Result: At the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the criminal complaint dismissed. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant inadvertently left his firearm in his travel and he forgot that his firearm was in his travel bag when he went to the airport. When notified of the discovery, Defendant was extremely cooperative and apologetic. Security seized the firearm and allowed the Defendant and his family to get on their flight. Defendant is 59 year-old with no criminal record.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDS MAN CHARGED WITH IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM.

Police were conducting an investigation into drug distribution and executed a search warrant at the Defendant’s home. The target of the search warrant was the son of the Defendant’s girlfriend who resided in the Defendant’s home. Police searched the home for drugs and weapons. Defendant’s girlfriend told the police that the Defendant had a valid LTC and that he had a firearm in the house. Police searched the home and located the Defendant’s firearm, which was not secured. As a result, the Defendant was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm pursuant to G.L. c. 140, §131L.

Result: At a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was successful in getting the criminal complaint for Improper Storage of a Firearm dismissed. Defendant is 35 year-old with no criminal record. He works three jobs to support his disabled girlfriend.

Brookline District Court

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS CHARGE OF ASSAULT & BATTERY WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON DISMISSED AGAINST GREEK IMMIGRANT.

The client is a 54 year-old man with no criminal record. In 1988, he emigrated to the U.S. from Greece. He never applied for U.S. citizenship. He is married and has two adult children. He owns and operates his own landscaping and snow plow company. On the incident in question, Defendant was performing a fall clean up at a residence in Brookline. He was using a leaf blower to gather and remove the leaves. He had blown some leaves into the street. The alleged victim confronted the Defendant and asked him not to blow leaves into the street, but the Defendant continued blowing the leaves into the street. The alleged victim became upset and started to take pictures of the Defendant’s landscaping truck with his cell phone. The Defendant knocked the cell phone out of the victim’s hands and waved the hose of the leaf blower at him. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon pursuant to G.L. c. 265, §15A, a felony offense, which would result in possible deportation if the Defendant was convicted.

Result: Attorney Gerald J. Noonan was able to get the felony charge dismissed. Had the client been convicted of the felony offense, he faced possible deportation from the United States.

Barnstable District Court

PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NOT GUILTY VERDICT IN CASE OF CARRYING A FIREARM WHILE INTOXICATED.

The client, a longtime restaurant manager and resident of Yarmouth, was charged with Carrying a Firearm While Intoxicated (G.L. c. 269, §10H) in the Barnstable District Court. The police received a call for a wellness check. Defendant’s father reported to the police that the Defendant made suicidal statements and was in the possession of a firearm while parked in his car outside the father’s house. Upon arrival, the police officer observed the Defendant parked in a vehicle with his firearm located on the passenger seat. The officer observed numerous empty nip bottles of liquor in the vehicle. The officer determined that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and charged him with Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated.

Result: At trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan challenged the prosecution’s evidence that the Defendant was intoxicated and under the influence of alcohol. The Commonwealth’s case rested on the testimony of the police officer and his opinion that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol. The case was won on Attorney Noonan’s cross-examination of the police officer. After his cross-examination of the police officer, the trial judge found that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden of proving that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and that his consumption of alcohol affected his ability to safely carry a firearm.

District Court

AN ASPIRING POLICE OFFICER’S LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS SUSPENDED FOR IMPROPERLY STORING HIS FIREARM, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS REINSTATEMENT OF THE CLIENT’S LTC.

The client, a young man with no criminal record, was in the process of applying to become a police officer. The client was highly qualified for the position of police officer. The client progressed quite far in the application process. During the application process, a police officer interviewed the client at his residence. The interviewing officer requested to see where the client’s firearm was stored in his residence. The client escorted the officer to his bedroom. The officer observed that the client’s firearm was located in the drawer of his nightstand, but the firearm was not stored properly, as it was secured in a locked container or affixed with a trigger-lock. Due to the fact that the client failed to store his firearm properly in compliance with Massachusetts law, the client’s License to Carry Firearms was suspended, and his hopes of becoming a police officer was destroyed. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan appealed the suspension of the LTC and eventually won the reinstatement of the client’s LTC restoring his hopes of becoming a police officer in the future.

Lawrence District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS NOT GUILTY VERDICTS ON ALL CHARGES, INCLUDING SERIOUS FIREARMS CHARGES CARRYING MINIMUM-MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCES. 

Defendant was charged with Carrying a Firearm without a License (G.L. c. §269, §10(a)), Carrying a Loaded Firearm without a License (G.L. c. 269, §10(n)), Carrying a Dangerous Weapon (G.L. c. 269, §10(b)), and Operating a Vehicle with a Suspended License (G.L. c. 90, §23). If convicted of Carrying a Firearm without a License, Defendant faced a minimum-mandatory jail sentence of 18 months, and another minimum-mandatory sentence of 2.5 years in jail if convicted of Carrying a Loaded Firearm without a License.

Result: Defendant was a resident of New Hampshire. He left his home in New Hampshire to visit a friend in Lawrence. While returning home to New Hampshire, after visiting his friend, Defendant was stopped by a State Trooper in Methuen because of a non-working headlight. Upon the stop, the Trooper learned that the Defendant had a suspended Massachusetts driver’s license and placed him under arrest. While arresting him, the Trooper located a loaded handgun in the Defendant’s pant pocket. Under a new decision announced by the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts, in order to prove the firearm offenses, the Commonwealth must present evidence that the Defendant did not have a valid firearms license. Commonwealth v. Guardado, 491 Mass. 666 (2023) At trial, the Commonwealth called a witness from the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS), which is responsible for maintaining a database of all persons issued firearm licenses in Massachusetts. This witness testified that she was provided with the Defendant’s name and his Date of Birth. When the witness entered the Defendant’s first name, last name, and DOB, into the database, the results disclosed that there was no record of the Defendant having ever been issued a firearm license in Massachusetts. In a surprise attack at trial, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented evidence that the Commonwealth did not provide CJIS with the proper name for the Defendant. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan successfully argued that the Commonwealth failed to prove that the Defendant did not have a valid firearms license in Massachusetts because CJIS was not provided with the correct name for the Defendant. Under cross-examination, the witness from CJIS testified that she did not enter the Defendant’s correct name into the database. Further, Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant was a resident of New Hampshire, had a New Hampshire address, had a New Hampshire driver’s license, and had his motor vehicle registered in New Hampshire. Attorney Noonan argued that the Commonwealth did not conduct any record-searches to determine whether the Defendant had any firearm licenses issued to him in New Hampshire, or whether the Defendant’s firearm was registered in New Hampshire, or whether the Defendant was legally permitted to own and possess this firearm in New Hampshire. After two-hours of deliberation, the jury found the Defendant Not Guilty of all charges, and the Defendant was free to leave.

Brockton District Court

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS DISMISSAL OF ALL CHARGES, INCLUDING SIX FIREARM CHARGES, CARRYING MINIMUM-MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCES, AND ANOTHER COUNT OF RESISTING ARREST.

Defendant was charged with seven criminal offenses, including: Two-counts of Carrying a Firearm without a License (G.L. c. §269, §10(a)), two-counts of Carrying a Loaded Firearm without a License (G.L. c. 269, §10(n)), Possession of Firearm without F.I.D. (G.L. c. 269, §10(h)), Possession of Ammunition without F.I.D. (G.L. c. 269, §10(h)(1), Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L), and Resisting Arrest (G.L. c. 268, §32B). If convicted, Defendant was facing serious minimum-mandatory jail time and deportation from the United States.

Result: Defendant was a front-seat passenger in a vehicle, which was wanted in connection with a drive-by shooting in Boston. About a week after the shooting, State Troopers observed the suspect vehicle and attempted to pull it over, but a high-speed chase ensued from Milton to Brockton, which ultimately ended with the suspect vehicle crashing into an intersection in Brockton. Police observed a loose pistol magazine at the feet of the operator. In the glove compartment, located in the passenger side area where the Defendant had been seated, police found two firearms, a large capacity firearm, and ammunition. Police alleged that the Defendant resisted arrest when they commanded him to exit the passenger side of the vehicle. The operator and defendant-passenger were charged with a multitude of firearm offenses and resisting arrest. At a suppression hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan elicited evidence from the State Trooper, which would prove to be vital to the Defendant’s case at trial. The glove-compartment, where the firearms were stored, was locked and the Defendant did not have possession of the key. Troopers admitted that they did not observe the Defendant reach for or touch the glove-compartment, and Troopers did not see the Defendant attempt to hide or conceal evidence. Although they claimed that the Defendant resisted arrest, Attorney Noonan was able to get that charge dismissed for insufficient evidence. No fingerprints were lifted from the firearms or ammunition. On the day of trial, the co-defendant (operator of the vehicle) pled guilty to most of the charges, but Attorney Noonan remained steadfast that his client was innocent and refused to enter into any plea negotiations. Recognizing that Attorney Noonan was prepared, ready, willing and able to try this case, the prosecutor dismissed all charges against the Defendant.

Fitchburg District Court

CLIENT’S LTC DENIED WAS DUE TO FELONY CONVICTION AND UNTRUTHFULNESS, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WINS APPEAL, REVERSING THE DENIAL, AND AN LTC HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE CLIENT. 

Client applied for a License to Carry Firearms, but the police department denied his application on the grounds that the client had a disqualifying felony conviction from Florida, and THAT the client was untruthful on the application when he denied that he had ever been convicted of a felony. On appeal, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtained all records relating to the client’s criminal case in Florida. In the Florida case, client was charged with Grand Theft and received a disposition known as Adjudication Withheld. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan conducted legal research showing that a disposition of Adjudication Withheld does not constitute a conviction under Florida law or Massachusetts law. Attorney Noonan argued that his client was not untruthful on the application because he correctly disclosed that he had not been convicted of a felony because, legally, the disposition in his Florida case did not constitute a conviction. After a hearing, including testimony, and after consideration of Attorney Noonan’s legal arguments, the judge reversed the decision denying the client’s LTC and ordered the police department to issue him a License to Carry Firearms.

CLIENT’S APPLICATION FOR A LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS WAS DENIED DUE TO UNTRUTHFULNESS IN DISCLOSING HIS CRIMINAL HISTORY, BUT ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN WON APPEAL, REVERSING THE DENIAL, AND AN LTC HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE CLIENT.

In 2016, client had his License to Carry Firearms suspended because he was arrested and charged with domestic violence, which was later dismissed. The criminal case was later sealed. Client, with another attorney, appealed the 2016 LTC suspension, and lost. In 2023, client reapplied for a License to Carry Firearms, which was denied. Client hired Attorney Patrick J. Noonan to appeal the denial. At the hearing, the officer testified that the client filled out the application form untruthfully. On the application, client was asked whether he had ever been arrested or appeared in court for any criminal case, and the client answered “yes.” However, the application form required the applicant to provide the details and circumstances of the criminal case, but the client did not provide any description of the criminal case. The officer believed that the client was being untruthful because he did not provide any description of the criminal case. After submitting the application, the client was interviewed by the police officer. When asked about his criminal history, the client told the officer that the criminal case was “sealed,” a truthful statement. The officer was able to obtain a copy of the police report on his criminal case. When asked about the incident resulting in his arrest, the client was truthful, not evasive and answered all the officer’s questions. Attorney Noonan argued that the client fulfilled his obligation by answering in the affirmative, on the application, regarding his criminal history. Attorney Noonan argued that the application form was vague because the application form did not state that the applicant was required to provide information on “sealed” criminal cases. To prove that the client was truthful, Attorney Noonan elicited testimony from the officer that, during the interview, the client was truthful when questioned about his arrest. The court agreed with Attorney Noonan, reversed the decision denying his LTC, and issued an order for the police department to issue him an LTC.

CHARGE OF IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST U.S. NAVY VETERAN DISMISSED AT CLERK-MAGISTRATE’S HEARING.

Westboro Police was notified by the suicide prevention line that they received a phone call from a female who was contemplating suicide and threatened to “shoot themselves.” However, the caller did not leave any information. Police began to ping the cell phone number and they learned that the cell phone belonged to the Defendant. Police then responded to the Defendant’s apartment where they encountered the female caller who stated that her boyfriend, defendant, owned a firearm. Police ran a search, which revealed that the Defendant had a License to Carry Firearms (LTC) from Georgia. Police then questioned the Defendant as to whether he had a firearm in his apartment. Defendant stated that he had his firearm in the bedroom closet. However, the female told police that she had possession of the Defendant’s firearm. Police seized the firearm from the female and transported her to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. Westboro Police charged the Defendant with Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, § 131L.

Result: At the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence regarding his client’s military service. Client was honorably discharged after serving six years in the U.S. Navy. He attained the rank of 2nd Class Petty Officer and worked as an Aviation Electronic Technician. Attorney Noonan presented evidence of awards and medals his client earned from his valiant military service. Client had no criminal record. The client wanted to work for the Department of Defense as a civilian operations network engineer and the outcome of this criminal complaint had the potential to bar him from even applying. In light of the client’s background, military service, and plans for future employment, the clerk-magistrate did not issue the complaint.

The client is a 41 year-old, happily married, father of three children. The client applied for a License to Carry Firearms with the police department in his place of residence. The police department denied his application for LTC because of two prior criminal cases on his record, which disqualified him.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented the police department with evidence that the two prior criminal cases should not disqualify his client from obtaining an LTC. One of the prior criminal cases, a felony drug conviction, was later vacated by the court and should not be considered as grounds for disqualification. The other prior criminal case, a charge of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon, resulted in a Not Guilty verdict, which should not be considered as grounds for disqualification. Attorney Noonan also presented evidence showing that his client was a suitable person to possess a firearm. After considering Attorney Noonan’s evidence, the police department changed its mind and issued the client a license to carry firearms.

IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST DISMISSED, AS ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN ARGUES THAT THE FIREARMS WERE INOPERABLE, HEIRLOOMS, WHICH WERE PASSED DOWN BY HIS GRANDFATHER.

Client’s ex-wife obtained a 209A abuse prevention order against her ex-husband, the Defendant. Franklin Police went to the Defendant’s home in Franklin to serve him with the restraining order and to seize his firearms. Police observed that the firearms were in a case but not properly secured and they charged the client with Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L)

Result: Client received a summons to appear in Wrentham District Court for an arraignment on the charge of Improper Storage of a Firearm. Client immediately retained Gerald J. Noonan who was able to dismiss the criminal complaint prior to arraignment on the grounds that his client was entitled to a clerk-magistrate’s hearing prior to the issuance of any criminal charge. If the client were arraigned, the gun charge would be on his record. At the clerk’s hearing, Attorney Noonan argued that the firearms were inoperable. The firearms were passed down to the client by his deceased grandfather. Client never fired the guns nor did he have any ammunition for the guns. The client was planning on selling the firearms to a dealer and using the money to make a down payment on a new house. Client was a Medical Technologist and biomedical laboratory technician. Client had no criminal record. The clerk magistrate decided to hold the matter open for a period of time and so long as the client stays out of trouble the charge will be dismissed.

CHARGES OF FILING A FALSE POLICE REPORT AND IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST CAPE COD MAN AND RUSSIAN IMMIGRANT ARE DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING.

Defendant, a resident of Hyannis, called police while intoxicated to report that his roommate stole his gun. When Barnstable Police arrived at the scene, Defendant was intoxicated and was yelling that his roommate stole his gun. Police found the gun sitting on the top of some laundry. Police placed the Defendant in protective custody because he was intoxicated and posed a threat of harming himself or his roommate. Police charged Defendant with making False Reports to Police Officers (G.L. c. 269, §13A) due to falsely accusing his roommate of stealing his gun. Police also charged Defendant with Improper Storage of a Firearm.

Result: At the clerk’s hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan convinced the clerk to dismiss the charge of Filing a False Police Report for lack of probable cause. Attorney Noonan brought Defendant’s roommate to the hearing as a character witness. The roommate worked for Defendant’s roofing company and Defendant gave him a place to live because he was homeless. The roommate did not want the Defendant charged and wanted the case dismissed. The roommate stated that the Defendant was a good boss and a good man for giving him a place to live while he got back on his feet. The criminal complaint will be dismissed so long as Defendant remains out of trouble.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES CLERK-MAGISTRATE TO DISMISS CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 32 YEAR-OLD BARTENDER FOR IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM SO LONG AS THE CLIENT DOES NOT GET INTO ANY TROUBLE

Defendant, a 32 year-old bartender from Manchester by the Sea, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm. Defendant was recently given a license to carry firearms (LTC). Shortly after getting licensed, Manchester by the Sea Police received an e-mail from a woman who had submitted a letter of recommendation on the Defendant’s behalf when he applied for his LTC. The e-mail stated that the woman wished to rescind her recommendation because the Defendant was abusing cocaine and alcohol and had dramatic mood changes and had bouts of severe aggression. After the e-mail, police were called to Defendant’s residence after receiving a call from different woman who reported that the Defendant was abusing substances and had “10 out of 10 rage.” This woman told police that she was concerned because the Defendant had a black handgun in his home. When police arrived, Defendant was not home. Later on, police went to the Defendant’s apartment when he was home. They asked him about his handgun and he denied having any handgun. Police told him that they received a report from a witness that he did have a handgun. Defendant changed his answer and admitted that he had a handgun. When police entered the apartment, they saw that the handgun was not properly secured or stored.

Result: At a Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that there was insufficient probable cause to support the charge of Improper Storage of a Firearm because the handgun was within the Defendant’s “control.” In order to convict someone of Improper Storage of a Firearm, the Commonwealth must prove that the firearm was not under the Defendant’s control. Here, Attorney Noonan argued that the firearm was within his control because it was sufficiently nearby (only 18 feet away in his bedroom). Moreover, Attorney Noonan stated that his client had no intention of renewing his LTC or owning any firearms in the future. After hearing, the Clerk-Magistrate decided dismiss the criminal complaint after one-year so long as the Defendant does not get into any trouble.

GUN CHARGE AGAINST FREETOWN TRUCK DRIVER, WHICH CARRIED A MANDATORY JAIL SENTENCE OF 18 MONTHS, WAS DISMISSED AFTER ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN PROVES THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO SUPPORT THE GUN CHARGE

Freetown Police were called to a residence after receiving 911 calls reporting that the Defendant retrieved a firearm and threatened to shoot his brother and then kill himself. Others in the house reported that the Defendant was mentally ill and a drug addict. Everyone had evacuated the home when police arrived. Defendant was arrested and brought to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. Defendant admitted that he did not have a license to possess the firearm and further stated that the bought the gun off the street.

Result: Defendant was charged with Carrying a Firearm without a License, which carries a mandatory jail sentence of 18 months. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of probable cause. Specifically, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that it was not illegal for the Defendant to unlawfully possess a firearm, so long as the firearm was under his “exclusive control” and possessed by him “in or on his residence.”

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN GETS 3 CHARGES FOR IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING SO LONG AS THE CLIENT STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE FOR ONE-YEAR.

Taunton Police executed a search warrant of the residence of the client’s step-father. The client resided in his step-father’s residence. The police were investigating internet crimes against a child. The client was not the target of the investigation. The search warrant authorized police to search any persons present in the home. When the police executed the search warrant, they searched the client’s bedroom where they found, in the client’s bedroom closet, two assault rifles, a Glock 9 mm. and 7 large capacity clips. The found that the firearms and ammunition were not properly secured and they charged the client with 3 counts of Improper Storage of a Firearm.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan argued that the Commonwealth must present sufficient evidence to prove that the firearms were “not” under the client’s control. Attorney Noonan argued that the firearms were within his client’s control because they were located in his bedroom closet and sufficiently nearby or in close proximity such that the client could access the firearms immediately. The Clerk Magistrate agreed to dismiss the complaint after one year so long as the client stays out of trouble and upon the condition that the client transfers all his firearms to another person who is authorized to possess them.

IMPROPER STORAGE OF FIREARM: DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING

The Police Report states: Lawrence Police called the client into the police station to answer questions with regards to an investigation involving the discovery of the client’s firearm in the possession of another person who had been arrested. According to the police, the client was deceptive in the interview. The client maintained that he lawfully secured his firearm in key lock safe in his home. The person who was found in possession of the firearm was a former boyfriend of the client’s mother. The client speculated that the boyfriend may have stolen the firearm by obtaining the key, which was kept near the safe.

Result: At the Clerk Magistrate’s hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan gets the criminal complaint dismissed and no criminal charge was put on the client’s record.

CHARGE OF IMPROPER STORAGE OF A FIREARM AGAINST WORLD WAR II VETERAN AND RETIRED SECRET SERVICE AGENT DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING AND LICENSE TO CARRY FIREARMS REINSTATED.

Defendant, an 87-year-old resident of Marlboro, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm when his pistol was found unattended in the Dollar Tree store in Hudson. An employee at the Dollar Tree discovered the pistol on the floor and contacted the police. After the incident was reported to police, at approximately 3:00 a.m., the police came to the Defendant’s residence where they seized all his firearms and issued him a notice that his License to Carry was suspended. The Law Offices of Gerald J. Noonan contacted the Hudson Police and requested that the matter be scheduled for a Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing rather than proceeding directly to an arraignment, which would result in the criminal charge being entered on the Client’s record. The Hudson Police agreed and the case was scheduled for a Clerk’s Hearing.

Result: At the Clerk’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuaded the Hudson Police Department and the Clerk-Magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint outright. Attorney Noonan argued that the Defendant was unaware that his pistol fell out of his holster because the pistol was so small and light that he didn’t notice it fall out. Attorney Noonan pointed out that the Defendant acted promptly and appropriately once he discovered that his firearm was missing. Upon realizing that his pistol was missing, Defendant retraced his steps and went back to the Dollar and reported to them that his pistol fell out. The Defendant then promptly went to the police department to report the incident. Attorney Noonan explained that his client was an 87 year-old decorated Marine Corps veteran of WWII who’s been a responsible gun owner his entire life. The Defendant was a retired Secret Service agent who served his country and protected Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. Because the criminal complaint was dismissed at the Clerk’s Hearing, the client did not have anything put on his criminal record. After the complaint was dismissed, the Law Offices of Gerald J. Noonan petitioned the police department to reinstate the Defendant’s license to carry.

ATTORNEY GERALD J. NOONAN CONVINCES CLERK-MAGISTRATE TO DISMISS GUN CHARGES AGAINST LOCAL RESTAURANT OWNER.

Client, a 41 year-old owner of a local restaurant and resident of Abington, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm and Failure to Surrender his Firearms to Police. The Police Report alleged: Abington Police were dispatched to the Client’s residence for a domestic dispute with his girlfriend. The Client had a valid License to Carry Firearms (LTC). When the police arrived to his residence, the Client responsibly informed the Police that he legally owned and possessed an AR-15 Assault Rifle and a .40 Caliber Smith and Wesson handgun. Prior to the police arriving, the Client placed all his firearms on his kitchen table so that the police were made aware that he possessed guns in his home. When the domestic dispute was resolved, the police instructed the Client to secure his firearms. As the client was securing his firearms, the police observed that the AR-15 Assault Rifle was not properly secured, as it was not in a secured container or equipped with a trigger lock. As a result, the police informed the Client that he would be charged with Improper Storage of the Firearm. As he was being charged with a firearms offense, the Client was required by law to surrender all his firearms to the police. The Client failed to promptly surrender his firearms to the police and was charged with that offense as well.

Result: The Client received notice that he would be arraigned in court on the gun charges. If he were arraigned, the gun charges would go on the Client’s criminal record. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss the case prior to his Client’s arraignment on the grounds that his Client was entitled to a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing prior to being arraigned. The charges were dismissed prior to arraignment and the Client was given his right to a Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing. At the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented evidence that his Client had his Assault Rifle trigger-locked prior to the police arriving to his home. The trigger lock was on his nightstand in his bedroom but the Client forgot to trigger-lock the rifle when the police were watching him secure his firearms. The Client forgot to trigger lock his rifle because he was nervous when the police were watching him secure his firearms. With regards to the charge of Failure to Surrender his Firearms, Attorney Noonan showed that his Client surrendered his firearms less than 48 hours after the police instructed him to. After taking Attorney Noonan’s arguments into consideration, the Clerk Magistrate dismissed all charges thereby saving his client from having any criminal charges on his record.

Client is a 51-year-old Electrical Engineer from Taunton who is married with three children. Client has been an avid hunter and shooter and a big believer in the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Guns have been a part of his life since he was a young kid. At age 16, he was issued a Firearms Identification Card. Client has had a License to Carry since 1995. He had been an active member of the National Rifle Association (NRA), the Gun Owner’s Action League of Massachusetts (GOAL), and Taunton Rifle and Pistol Club. He has advanced training in firearms. He is a member of Team Glock a competitive team of shooting professionals.

Since 1995, the client has had a License to Carry (LTC) but in 2016 the Police Department denied his Application to Renew his LTC because he had a conviction for a firearms offense. Specifically, the Client pled guilty to the offense of Leaving a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle. According to the Police Department, the conviction disqualified the client from getting an LTC.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan petitioned the Chief of Police to renew his client’s license to carry firearms. Under the law, a conviction for a violation of any firearms law disqualifies an applicant from getting an LTC. Here, Client’s LTC renewal was denied because he had a conviction for violating a firearms law. However, Attorney Noonan pointed out that: in order for a firearms violation to be a disqualifier, the firearms violation must carry a penalty of imprisonment. In his client’s case, the only punishment his client received for the firearms violation was a fine of $125.00. After considering Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s arguments, the client’s license to carry firearms was renewed.

FELONY GUN CHARGE AGAINST ASPIRING POLICE OFFICER DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT.

Client, 36 year-old man, had a valid License to Carry Firearms, including large capacity firearms. After finishing a day’s work as a Foreman for an Asphalt Company, client discovered that his handgun was stolen from his work truck. Client immediately went to the police station to report the theft of his firearm. Client spoke to the police officer in the lobby of the police station for approximately three minutes. After their brief discussion, the officer informed the client that he would be charging him with Improper Storage of a Firearm, a felony charge because the firearm was large capacity. Client had taken police entrance exams in New Hampshire and the Civil Service Exam in Massachusetts. Client was offered full-time positions as a police officer by several New Hampshire Police Departments. However, the client had his sights set on becoming a police officer in the town where he has long resided. The client had fulfilled the majority of the requirements to become a police officer in his home town. The client was in the process of finishing the rest of his requirements when this criminal complaint was filed against him.

Result: Prior to his arraignment, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan presented the Commonwealth with evidence that his client had his firearm properly locked in a secured container, as required by law. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan had two witnesses who were willing to testify that the client routinely stored his firearm in a metal box secured with a latch and key lock. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan pointed out that the Commonwealth would be unable to prove their case at trial. The offense of Improper Storage of a Firearm (G.L. c. 140, §131L) requires that the Commonwealth prove that the alleged firearm meets the definitional requirements of a firearm. Specifically, the Commonwealth must prove that the alleged firearm was a working firearm. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan pointed out that the Commonwealth would be unable to prove that the alleged firearm at issue met the definition of a firearm (i.e., that it was a working firearm) because the firearm was missing. After considering the evidence and arguments raised by Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, the Commonwealth dismissed the felony gun charge prior to arraignment. As a result, the client is now free to continue his pursuit of becoming a police officer.

IMPROPER STORAGE of FIREARM: DISMISSED

Police were dispatched to the Defendant’s residence in response to a 911 call. Upon arrival, police spoke to the Defendant’s brother-in-law who reported that he received a call from the Defendant’s wife telling him that the Defendant was highly intoxicated and she needed help. They wanted to bring the Defendant to the hospital so he could receive treatment for his substance abuse issues. Defendant refused and became argumentative. Prior to the police arriving, Defendant fled from the house. Police were concerned because the Defendant was wearing only a T-shirt and shorts and it was freezing outside. Later, police observed the Defendant fighting with his brother-in-law in the street. The fight caused a disturbance in the neighborhood. After breaking up the fight, police arrested the Defendant for Disturbing the Peace. After his arrest, police received information that some of the Defendant’s firearms may have been missing from his gun locker. The Defendant’s wife directed officers into the basement of their home and gave them permission to search the Defendant’s gun locker. The police observed that the gun locker was partially open and not locked. Due to the locker not being securely locked, police charged the Defendant with Improper Storage of a Firearm and seized all his firearms, which included: six rifles, two shotguns, and ammunition.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Suppress arguing that the Defendant’s wife did not have lawful authority to give police consent to search the Defendant’s private property. The hearing on the Motion to Suppress was continued. Prior to the next scheduled hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the District Attorney’s Office to dismiss the Improper Storage of a Firearm.

IMPROPER STORAGE of FIREARM: DISMISSED AT CLERK’S HEARING

Defendant was a retired 62 year-old grandfather of three with no criminal record. It was alleged that the Defendant negligently left his loaded revolver in a public bathroom.

Result: At a Clerk Magistrate Hearing, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan persuaded the Clerk-Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint against his client. The Clerk-Magistrate accepted Attorney Gerald J. Noonan’s proposal to dismiss the criminal complaint after six-months, so long as the Defendant does not commit any offenses. The criminal complaint will be dismissed on January 21, 2017, so long as the Defendant does not commit any new offenses.

ASSAULT & BATTERY: DISMISSED / RELEASED FROM JAIL
A & B with DANGEROUS WEAPON: DISMISSED / RELEASED FROM JAIL
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY: DISMISSED / RELEASED FROM JAIL

Defendant’s girlfriend called 911 to report that she had been assaulted by the Defendant and she was bleeding. The girlfriend told police that the Defendant started a verbal argument and he pushed her into a fish-tank causing the glass from the fish-tank to shatter. The girlfriend told police that pieces of the shattered glass were lodged in her body. She attempted to call 911 but the Defendant threw her cell phone to the ground and fled the apartment. Police observed the Defendant running in the area and they arrested him. Defendant was charged with Assault & Battery, Assault & Battery with a Dangerous Weapon, and Malicious Destruction of Property. Defendant was arraigned on these charges and released on personal recognizance.

While his case was pending, Defendant was arrested and charged with Assault & Battery (subsequent offense) and Malicious Destruction of Property stemming from a completely separate incident with his family. Police were dispatched to the residence of the Defendant’s parents for an Assault & Battery. Upon arrival, Defendant’s brother told police that the Defendant had punched him in the face. Police observed redness and swelling to the brother’s face. Defendant’s mother told police that the Defendant attacked her by grabbing her hair and attempting to push her down. Defendant’s father told police that the Defendant wrestled him to the ground. Police observed that the father had redness to his back and neck. The new offenses were eventually dismissed for lack of prosecution.

Because the Defendant committed these new offenses while his previous case was pending, the Commonwealth moved to revoke the Defendant’s bail. On 04/20/16, the Court revoked the Defendant’s bail and the Defendant was placed in custody. Defendant was facing 90 days in the house of correction because his bail was revoked by virtue of the new offenses.

Result: Defendant retained Attorney Gerald J. Noonan while he was in custody at the house of correction. Immediately, Attorney Gerald J. Noonan marked the original case for trial. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan obtained exculpatory text messages sent to the Defendant’s cell phone by his ex-girlfriend, the alleged victim – as well as exculpatory voice mails left on the Defendant’s cell phone by the alleged victim. Attorney Gerald J. Noonan located a witness who had been in a relationship with the alleged victim. This witness was willing to testify that the alleged victim had made threats to falsely accuse of him of crimes if she didn’t receive certain things in return from the witness. That is, if the witness did not comply with her demands, she would call the police and falsely accuse him of a crime. This was precisely the situation in the Defendant’s case. In the Defendant’s case, the alleged victim called 911 and falsely accused the Defendant of these crimes because the Defendant was unwilling to give in to the alleged victim’s demands. The evidence obtained by Attorney Gerald J. Noonan presented Fifth Amendment issues for the alleged victim because she would have incriminated herself when testifying against the Defendant at trial. On the day of trial, all criminal charges were dismissed and the Defendant was released from custody.

IMPROPER STORAGE of FIREARM: DISMISSED AT TRIAL

Defendant called 911 to report that her husband had taken her revolver and threatened to shoot himself with it. Defendant was able to take the revolver away from her husband. Upon arrival, police spoke with the husband who stated that he had taken his wife’s revolver from her gun safe, which was unlocked, and threatened to shoot himself with it. The husband was taken to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. Defendant told police that she had locked her gun safe and that her husband must have known the combination in order to access the firearm.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan prepared the case for trial. Attorney Noonan was prepared to argue that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden of proving that the firearm in question was a working firearm and capable of discharging a shot or bullet. The Commonwealth failed to have the firearm examined and test fired by a ballistician in order to prove that the firearm was operable. In addition, Defendant’s husband invoked his marital privilege not to testify against his wife, the Defendant. Without the husband’s testimony, the Commonwealth would be unable to prove that the Defendant did not properly secure the firearm. On the day of trial, the Commonwealth moved to dismiss the criminal complaint.

IMPROPER STORAGE OF FIREARM: DISMISSED

Defendant called the police to report that someone broke into his apartment and stole his shotgun and ammunition from his gun case. Upon arrival, the police inspected the gun case. The gun case had been tampered with and some of the latches were missing. The officer believed that the Defendant did not have a lock on his gun case and charged him with Improper Storage of a Firearm. Police took fingerprints from the gun case. The only identifiable fingerprints on the gun case belonged to the Defendant. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Preserve the gun case. At trial, the Commonwealth did not have the gun case. Attorney Noonan subpoenaed the police dispatcher because the Defendant called the police and reported to the police dispatcher that he had a lock on his gun case. Attorney Noonan intended to call the Defendant’s father to testify. Defendant’s father would go shooting with the Defendant every other weekend. Defendant would bring his gun case when shooting with his father. Defendant’s father was willing to testify that the Defendant always had the same lock on his gun case every time they went shooting together. Defendant’s father was willing to give a description of the Defendant’s lock. Defendant’s father was willing to testify that they went shooting together 2 weeks before this incident and that the Defendant’s gun case had the same lock on it. In addition, Attorney sought to elicit testimony that the Defendant identified the suspect to police who he believed broke into his apartment and stole his firearm and ammunition. Attorney Noonan sought to show that the Commonwealth never investigated the suspect believed to have stolen the Defendant’s firearm. Police did not test the gun case for the suspect’s fingerprints. Attorney Noonan also intended to call the Defendant’s sister who lived in the same apartment with him and she was willing to testify that she told police that the same suspect stole money from her apartment the same day that the Defendant reported his firearm stolen.

Result: The day before trial, the Commonwealth informed Attorney Patrick J. Noonan that they would be dismissing the case on the day of trial.

IMPROPER STORAGE OF FIREARM: DISMISSED PRIOR TO ARRAIGNMENT

Defendant, the president of a company with no prior criminal record, was charged with Improper Storage of a Firearm when police searched his apartment and found a fully loaded handgun in the drawer to his nightstand in his bedroom. The fully loaded handgun was not equipped with a trigger lock and was not secured in any locked container. At his arraignment, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss Prior to Arraignment successfully argued that the Defendant was denied his statutory right to a Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing prior to the issuance of any criminal charges. The case was remanded for a Clerk’s Hearing.

Result: After getting the case dismissed prior to arraignment, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the police prosecutor and the clerk magistrate to hold the matter open for a period of one year. If the Defendant stays out of trouble for one year, the charge will be dismissed prior to arraignment and he will not have any criminal charges on his record.

UNLAWFUL POSS. OF AMMUNITION: DISMISSED
NEGLIGENT OPERATION: DISMISSED

At 12:30 a.m., police responded to the scene of a motor vehicle accident. Defendant was driving his pick-up truck and struck a utility pole. Upon arrival, police called the ambulance and the Defendant was transported to the emergency room. Upon investigation, it was determined that the Defendant operated his vehicle negligently so as to endanger the safety of others. Police observed heavy front-end damage to the pick-up indicating that the Defendant was operating at a high rate of speed. Contents in the bed of the pick-up had been scattered all over the road. Police observed extensive damage to the utility, which had been broken in half also indicating that the Defendant struck the pole at a high rate of speed. Police observed very little skid marks prior to the crash. Police searched the Defendant’s pick-up truck and found a box containing 50 cartridges of .357 caliber ammunition. Police also found 13 cartridges of .38 caliber ammunition. Defendant did not have a Firearms Identification Card (FID) or any license to possess the ammunition. Defendant was a 21 year-old male with no criminal record. He had an Associate’s Degree and planned on enrolling as a student at Bridgewater State University. He was employed as full-time construction worker. He was also employed by the city as a snow-plower. The issuance of the criminal complaint would have jeopardized Defendant’s employment for the city as a snow-plower and would have affected his ability to enroll in college.

Result: At a clerk’s hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the police department and the clerk-magistrate to dismiss the criminal complaint. As a result, no criminal charges will appear on the Defendant’s record.

CARRYING FIREARM while INTOX.: DISMISSED at CLERK’S HEARING

Police were dispatched to the Mandarin Restaurant for a domestic disturbance. Upon arrival, police approached the Defendant in the parking lot with his girlfriend. Police observed that the Defendant and his girlfriend were intoxicated. Police learned that Defendant’s girlfriend had an altercation with Defendant’s ex-girlfriend inside the restaurant and they were asked to leave. Officers allowed the Defendant to retrieve his personal belongings from his vehicle because a friend was on his way to pick the Defendant and his girlfriend. Police observed a leather jacket in his vehicle with a “Devil’s Disciples” patch on the back along a 1% patch and German Swastikas. Police observed a holster affixed to his belt on the small of his back with a clip. The firearm was identified as a Smith & Wesson SW40VE 40. caliber semi-automatic pistol with a magazine containing 13 jacketed hollow point rounds with one round loaded in the chamber. Police located another firearm on the Defendant’s right hip identified as a Smith & Wesson SW9VE 9 mm. semi-automatic pistol with a magazine containing 9 jacketed hollow point rounds and one round loaded in the chamber. Defendant also had five knifes on his person. Defendant had a valid license to carry firearms with no restrictions. Police placed the Defendant in protective custody and subsequently charged him with Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan, on the first court appearance, argued a Motion to Dismiss on the basis that the Defendant was denied his statutory right to a clerk-magistrate’s hearing. The Commonwealth argued that the Defendant was not entitled to a clerk’s hearing because he posed an imminent threat to the public based upon the nature of the charge, the fact that the firearms were fully loaded with rounds in the chamber, and because he was affiliated with a motorcycle gang. Attorney Noonan convinced the judge that the Defendant did not pose an imminent threat because: he had a constitutional right to carry his firearms, the offense was a non-violent misdemeanor, defendant was cooperative and compliant, defendant did not engage in any violent or threatening behavior, and he was not involved in the domestic disturbance. Attorney Noonan argued that the police unfairly profiled him upon learning that he was associated with a biker gang. Upon learning that he was affiliated with a biker gang, police placed him in protective custody (alleging that he was intoxicated) when they initially allowed him to leave the scene upon being picked up by his friend. Had the Defendant not been affiliated with a biker gang, police would have allowed him to leave the scene with his firearms.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed. Subsequently, Police requested a clerk-magistrate’s hearing. At the hearing, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the clerk-magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint but to keep the matter on file for three-months after which time the criminal complaint will be dismissed, so long as the Defendant does not commit any new crimes.

FIREARM SUSPENSION: LICENSE TO CARRY REINSTATED

Client had a valid license to carry firearms (LTC). The chief of police suspended his LTC pursuant to G.L. c. 140, § 131 because he was arrested and charged with a felony sex offense. As a result of his arrest, client was required to surrender all his firearms to the police department. After successfully resolving his criminal case, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan petitioned the chief of police to reinstate his client’s LTC and return his firearms.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan convinces chief of police to reinstate his client’s LTC and his firearms were returned.

CARRYING FIREARM while INTOX.: DISMISSED

Police were dispatched to a restaurant for a disturbance. Upon arrival, police encountered the Defendant in the parking lot. Police observed that the Defendant was intoxicated and they placed him in protective custody. Defendant had a loaded and chambered .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol in his back waistband. Defendant also had another loaded and chambered 9 mm. pistol in a holster affixed to his belt. Defendant also had five knives on his person. In his Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Patrick J. Noonan argued that the complaint should be dismissed because the Defendant was denied his opportunity for a clerk-magistrate’s hearing under G.L. c. 218, §35A. The Commonwealth argued that the Defendant was not entitled to a clerk’s hearing because he posed an imminent threat to the public based upon the nature of the charge, the level of his intoxication, the fact that the firearms were fully loaded and chambered, and because he was affiliated with a notorious motorcycle gang.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss was allowed without prejudice and the Commonwealth must request a Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing in order to pursue the charge.

ASSAULT w/ DANGEROUS WEAPON: DISMISSED AT TRIAL
ASSAULT and BATTERY: DISMISSED AT TRIAL
THREAT TO COMMIT CRIME (MURDER) DISMISSED AT TRIAL
UNLAWFUL POSSESSION of FIREARM: DISMISSED AT TRIAL
UNLAWFUL POSSESSION of AMMUNITION: DISMISSED AT TRIAL

Defendant was arrested on allegations made against him by his ex-girlfriend of four years. She alleged that the Defendant choked her. She alleges a history of abuse, alleging that two-weeks prior to the incident Defendant choked her to the point that she had visible markings on her neck. She alleges that Defendant took out a black revolver and threatened to kill her with it. Police searched the Defendant’s home and found the black revolver (matching the alleged victim’s description) loaded with four rounds of ammunition. The alleged victim claims that the Defendant called her and threatened to kill her by slicing her throat. The alleged victim obtained an Abuse Prevention Order against the Defendant. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan conducted extensive discovery and amassed damaging evidence to impeach the alleged victim’s credibility at trial.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan obtains an outright dismissal of all criminal charges, which included violent offenses, a violent felony offense, and firearm offenses.

CARRYING FIREARM without LICENSE: DISMISSED upon MOTION

Police searched the Defendant’s home and found a Smith & Wesson 28 Special Revolver loaded with four rounds of ammunition. Defendant did not have any license to possess or carry firearms. In his Motion to Dismiss, Attorney Noonan argued that there is a “residency exemption” in the amended statute, which applies to those possessing a firearm while “present in or on his residence.” Citing case law, Attorney Noonan argued that the evidence showed that the Defendant possessed the firearm in his residence, which is not a crime, even though he did not have any gun license.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan’s Motion to Dismiss is allowed and he saves his client from serving a minimum mandatory jail sentence of 18 months.

FIREARM OFFENSE: DISMISSED at ARRAIGNMENT

Oxford Police were dispatched to a domestic disturbance wherein a third-party caller reported that the Defendant and his wife were having a physical dispute. Upon arrival, officers observed items strewn about the bedroom. Defendant was in the process of packing his belongings in his bedroom to leave the house. Police observed a shotgun in Defendant’s bedroom closet, which was loaded and not trigger-locked. Police charged Defendant with Improper Storage of a Firearm. Client retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan filed a Motion to Dismiss asserting that there was insufficient probable cause to charge his client with the firearm offense because firearm was not outside the Defendant’s control because he had the shotgun sufficiently nearby him in his bedroom closet, a couple feet away, as he was packing his belongings in the bedroom. Attorney Noonan argued that the firearm was within arm’s reach of the Defendant and not outside his control.

Result: At the arraignment, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the gun charge upon the payment of $100 in court costs.

CARRYING FIREARM W/OUT LICENSE: DISMISSED
POSSESSION OF AMMUNITION: DISMISSED
DEFACING SERIAL NUMBERS: DISMISSED
POSSESSION OF FIREARM WITHOUT FID: PROBATION

Client, 26-year-old male, was arrested during a raid where the gang unit task force of the Massachusetts State Police executed a search warrant of a residence in Brockton and found several large capacity firearms and ammunition. Client made inculpatory statements linking him to the firearms in the basement of the residence. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan persuaded the Commonwealth to amend the felony “carrying” charge, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of one-year in prison, down to a lesser misdemeanor simple possession charge. The Defendant pled guilty to the lesser-included misdemeanor charge and was placed on probation. Attorney Patrick J. Noonan was successful in getting all remaining charges dismissed.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan saves client from serving minimum mandatory jail sentence of one-year on gun charge.

ATTORNEY PATRICK J. NOONAN GETS FELONY CONVICTION FOR BREAKING & ENTERING AGAINST TRUCK DRIVER VACATED AND THROWN OUT.

Defendant is a 48 year-old commercial truck driver, a happily married man, and a loving father. Defendant applied for a License to Carry Firearms (LTC). However, the police department denied his application for an LTC because he had a felony conviction on his record. Defendant was shocked to hear that he had a felony conviction. Defendant obtained a copy of his criminal record, which showed that he had been convicted of Breaking and Entering in the Nighttime with the Intent to Commit a Felony when he was 14 years-old. He was convicted in 1984. Defendant knew he had a juvenile case when he was really young but did not know he had been convicted of a felony. Defendant has no other criminal record. Defendant retained Attorney Patrick J. Noonan to vacate his felony conviction.

Result: Attorney Patrick J. Noonan conducted an investigation and learned that the felony Breaking & Entering charge stemmed from an incident when the Defendant, at age 14, went into a vacant home with a friend to smoke a cigarette. A neighbor reported seeing people inside the unoccupied home and the Defendant was later arrested. This was a home in the Defendant’s neighborhood that kids would use as a cut through yard. Kids cut through the yard because no one was living there. Attorney Noonan obtained records for the residence showing that it had been unoccupied at the time of the offense. Attorney Noonan sent a written request to the District Attorney’s Office requesting to vacate the conviction arguing that his client did not have the intent to commit the felony because he merely went into the unoccupied house with a friend to smoke a cigarette. His only intent was to commit a Trespass. They did not steal anything from the house. Attorney Noonan provided the DA with evidence regarding his client’s background as a hard-working guy, law-abiding citizen, and family man and the collateral consequences this old felony conviction has caused. The District Attorney’s Office reviewed the case. The DA’s Office was very reasonable and agreed to vacate the Defendant’s felony conviction. Today, the conviction was thrown out.