Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Racial Basis in Jury Selection Case May Be Decided by SCOTUS

February 20, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

Peremptory challenges are an essential tool used by trial lawyers. They allow an attorney to object to a proposed juror during selection without giving a reason or justification. However, when peremptory challenges are coupled with racial bias, dangerous results can occur. The case of Miles v. California is pending before the Supreme Court and asks the question of whether a court may consider reasons distinguishing stricken jurors from those accepted by the prosecutor when the prosecutor did not cite a reason.

What happened in the Miles case?

The Miles case concerns Johnny Duane Miles, a Black man charged with the rape and murder of a white woman. He was eventually convicted and sentenced to death. The issue here is not whether Miles was innocent or guilty, but instead whether Mile’s case would have turned out differently if the jury selection process was different. During jury selection, the prosecutor raised some eyebrows when he used peremptory challenges to remove every single Black juror from the main panel. The prosecutor tried to justify his strikes but it seemed that race was the only factor because the prosecutor even removed a young Black man named Simeon Greene, who had pro-prosecution and pro-law enforcement beliefs, which would help the prosecution.

Can a police officer search a person’s criminal record during a traffic stop under the 4th Amendment?

February 4, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable intrusion and promises that citizens will not have their “persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Carlisle v. Kentucky asks the question of whether courts can adopt a categorical rule allowing law enforcement to prolong every traffic stop by performing a criminal records check, or on the other hand, whether the Fourth Amendment requires an individualized, case-by-case approach that allows checks only when the government offers some evidence that the check related to the officer’s safety. The circuits are split concerning this issue. This case is current pending a petition for certiorari before the Untied States Supreme Court.

Five courts allow law enforcement to perform a criminal record check in every traffic stop in theory and agree that these checks are inherent to officer safety. On the other hand, two courts have adopted a case-by-case basis for officers searching a criminal record. These courts adopt the approach where the court will evaluate the specific circumstances of the particular stop to determine whether the officer’s safety was so at the risk that the search of criminal records was appropriate.

Does the Constitution Permit Zoom motions in Massachusetts?

January 27, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

Is it Constitutional to Conduct Evidentiary Hearings Over Zoom?

In John Vasquez Dias v. Commonwealth the question before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was whether a criminal defendant’s constitutional rights are violated by a court choosing to pursue an evidentiary hearing, over the defendant’s objections, over Zoom. Vasquez Diaz was charged with drug trafficking and if convicted, he could face over a decade in prison.

What happened in Vasquez Diaz?

Can you be denied a Gun license based on a nonviolent misdemeanor offense under the Second Amendment?

January 14, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

Does the Second Amendment permit States to deprive someone of the right to bear arms for a misdemeanor offense? The right to bear arms is one that a large portion of Americans consider of the utmost importance. In Holloway v. Barr, a case pending before the United States Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari, Holloway argues that losing his Second Amendment rights due to a nonviolent misdemeanor is a constitutional violation.

A lifetime ban on firearms is a penalty most felons are handed as part of their punishment. The extent to which people who committed past crimes can be banned is an issue ripe with disagreement. Some believe the logic is that dangerous people should not be allowed to have firearms, so violent felons should be prohibited from using them. Another rationale for disarming former felons is that the individual lacks virtue, which is why they should not own a firearm.

What is the law concerning individuals with criminal records owning a firearm?

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Decides Cell Site Location Information Case

January 10, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

What type of cell phone information can the police obtain without a warrant? This is an important question under the 4th amendment that the Massachusetts Supreme Court recently addressed. Nowadays, nobody leaves their cell-phones out of their sight, and a cell phone is almost an extension of a person’s body. However, inside of your smartphone are powerful location tracking services, that “ping” your location whenever you are near a cell tower. The use of this data in criminal cases is controversial, and many would consider it an invasion of privacy. The Supreme Judicial Court recently decided a murder case involving cell site location information (CSLI) in Commonwealth v. Wilkerson.

What happened in Wilkerson?

The victim in this case was twenty-three year old Kristopher Rosa, who was a longtime rival of one of the defendant’s high school friends, Rhandisyn Lawrence. Lawrence and the victim had a rivalry that apparently stemmed from both of them dating the same woman, Mendes, who the victim later had a child with. In 2011, Lawrence and the defendant, Wilkerson, chased Rosa in cars when Rosa and his girlfriend were on the way to his mother’s house. He was shot in the chest while still driving and pronounced dead from a gunshot wound. The defendant was convicted of first degree murder of Rosa two years after the incident, when the defendant’s girlfriend called the police.

Accidents with Uber in Massachusetts and Arbitration Clause in Uber Terms of Service Contract

January 9, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

Uber and Lyft drivers are all over Massachusetts; while the number of people traveling with RideShare has certainly decreased with COVID-19, there are still a significant number of Lyft and Uber drivers on the road. What happens if you are involved in an accident with Uber or Lyft or have a dispute with one of these companies. Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Court decided a case that addressed whether the arbitration provision in the Uber contract was enforceable.

Is a Contract Formed When You Create an Uber Account?

This question was recently decided by the Massachusetts Supreme Court in Christopher P. Kauders & Another vs. Uber Technologies, Inc., & Another. In this case, a couple who had both downloaded Uber on their phones alleged discrimination by Uber against husband, who is legally blind, was refused an Uber ride because he was accompanied by his guard dog. Uber is a widely-used app that allows users to pay for transportation by Uber’s contracted drivers after downloading the app.

Massachusetts Civil Rights Lawyer discusses Excessive force lawsuit in Buffalo

January 8, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

Police Brutality Lawsuit Filed Over Arrest Forceful Arrest by Buffalo Police

Just one day into the new year, a young man in Buffalo suffered horrible injuries at the hands of a local police officer. Tyshawn Vance, a 21-year-old, filed a lawsuit Monday in the state Supreme Court. He alleges that officers beat him so severely that he suffered permanent injuries such as vision loss. Allegedly, officers threw him to the ground and beat him during a traffic stop. The police officers allege that Vance was pulled over for speeding and having a license plate light out, hardly the infraction that would welcome violence. A video of the offense shows Vance’s eye swollen and blood smeared on the asphalt, U.S. News reports.

The police allege that Vance had a pistol and drugs, according to an article from a Buffalo local news station.

Is an Offensive Snapchat Free Speech Protected by the First Amendment?

January 7, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

In a recent case, the Third Circuit held in Levy v. Mahanoy Area School District that a profane “snap” posted by a teenage girl was protected speech under the First Amendment. Today, any teen or young adult has grown up with Snapchat, an app that allows users to send their friends picture messages that disappear within a few seconds. Unless you take a “screenshot” of the message, the “snap” is gone forever. In the Levy case, student B.L.’s Snapchat resulted in her school suspending her.

What happened in Levy?

B.L., a student at Mahoney Area High School, tried out for the cheerleading team as a rising freshman, and she made the junior varsity team. The next year, instead of moving up to the varsity team, she remained in junior varsity. She was frustrated and disappointed that she had not moved up to the varsity team. The following Saturday, while spending time with friends. B.L. did what any teenager would do and took her frustrations to social media. She sent a Snapchat with her middle fingers up with the caption “f**k school, f**k softball, f**k cheer, f**k everything.” She posted this to her Snapchat “story,” meaning that the picture was visible to everyone on her friends list for 24 hours before disappearing from the app. One of B.L.’s teammates took a screenshot of the story and sent it to her cheerleading coach. As a result, B.L. was kicked off the cheerleading team.

How to Seal a Misdemeanor in Massachusetts?

January 2, 2021 | by Michael DelSignore

What is the Process to Seal a Misdemeanor?

One common questions many have after having been charged with a criminal case is how can I expunge it from my record. In Massachusetts, the law does not allow expungements, but does allow individuals to Seal their record which accomplishes the same objective–preventing employers from seeing any entry if they run a Massachusetts CORI.

What are the Steps to Seal your record?

Can you be required to take the COVID-19 Vaccination in Massachusetts?

December 28, 2020 | by Michael DelSignore

The COVID-19 vaccine is out and many wonder what the legal ramification are; can you be required to take the vaccine. As everyone is aware, the vaccine was rushed through at a record speed. Have all the side effects of the vaccine been adequately studied? We will not know the answer to this question for years. Some may not want to take a vaccine quickly before it has been fully studied.

The 4th Amendment is the Constitutional provision that most directly impacts our privacy and what control the government has over our body. I do not believe the State or Government can compel anyone to take the Vaccine and impose criminal or civil penalties; the case law allowing mandatory vaccination must allow for exceptions based on health risks and possible side effects to the person receiving the vaccine. The law could require vaccination as a condition to grant privileges , to attend school, to fly, participate in public events.

What about your job can an employer condition returning to work on vaccination?