Cambridge Misdemeanor Lawyer, Massachusetts


Joe  Serpa Lawyer

Joe Serpa

VERIFIED
Criminal, DUI-DWI, Felony, Misdemeanor, Traffic
Boston's Criminal Defense Attorney.

A Deeply Experienced Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer. Serious Representation For Serious Problems. Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Joe Serpa is am... (more)

FREE CONSULTATION 

CONTACT

800-717-3381

William J. Barabino

Criminal, DUI-DWI, Misdemeanor, Felony
Status:  In Good Standing           

FREE CONSULTATION 

CONTACT

Joseph M. Griffin

Criminal, DUI-DWI, Felony, Misdemeanor
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  23 Years

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Email, Phone, Text Messages, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Email, Phone, Text Messages, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

TIPS

Easily find Cambridge Misdemeanor Lawyers and Cambridge Misdemeanor Law Firms. For more attorneys, search all Criminal areas including DUI-DWI, Felony, RICO Act, White Collar Crime and Traffic attorneys.

LEGAL TERMS

CRIME

A type of behavior that is has been defined by the state, as deserving of punishment which usually includes imprisonment. Crimes and their punishments are defin... (more...)
A type of behavior that is has been defined by the state, as deserving of punishment which usually includes imprisonment. Crimes and their punishments are defined by Congress and state legislatures.

JURY NULLIFICATION

A decision by the jury to acquit a defendant who has violated a law that the jury believes is unjust or wrong. Jury nullification has always been an option for ... (more...)
A decision by the jury to acquit a defendant who has violated a law that the jury believes is unjust or wrong. Jury nullification has always been an option for juries in England and the United States, although judges will prevent a defense lawyer from urging the jury to acquit on this basis. Nullification was evident during the Vietnam war (when selective service protesters were acquitted by juries opposed to the war) and currently appears in criminal cases when the jury disagrees with the punishment--for example, in 'three strikes' cases when the jury realizes that conviction of a relatively minor offense will result in lifetime imprisonment.

IMPRISON

To put a person in prison or jail or otherwise confine him as punishment for committing a crime.

PLEA BARGAIN

A negotiation between the defense and prosecution (and sometimes the judge) that settles a criminal case. The defendant typically pleads guilty to a lesser crim... (more...)
A negotiation between the defense and prosecution (and sometimes the judge) that settles a criminal case. The defendant typically pleads guilty to a lesser crime (or fewer charges) than originally charged, in exchange for a guaranteed sentence that is shorter than what the defendant could face if convicted at trial. The prosecution gets the certainty of a conviction and a known sentence; the defendant avoids the risk of a higher sentence; and the judge gets to move on to other cases.

INSANITY

See criminal insanity.

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced '... (more...)
The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced 'to a moral certainty.' The jury must be convinced that the defendant committed each element of the crime before returning a guilty verdict.

NOLO CONTENDERE

A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committ... (more...)
A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committed the crime, but agrees to a punishment (usually a fine or jail time) as if guilty. Usually, this type of plea is entered because it can't be used as an admission of guilt if a civil case is held after the criminal trial.

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI)

The crime of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, including prescription drugs. Complete intoxication is not required; the l... (more...)
The crime of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, including prescription drugs. Complete intoxication is not required; the level of alcohol or drugs in the driver's body must simply be enough to prevent him from thinking clearly or driving safely. State laws specify the levels of blood alcohol content at which a person is presumed to be under the influence. Also called driving while intoxicated (DWI and drunk driving).

CONVICTION

A finding by a judge or jury that the defendant is guilty of a crime.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Commonwealth v. Becker

... of "sex offender" in the sex offender registration statute, [1] he is not required to register, and more specifically, that (1) the trial judge erred in denying the defendant's motion for a required finding of not guilty because (a) his conviction in New York was a misdemeanor and is not ...

Commonwealth v. Hernandez

... CORDY, J. This case involves the off-campus execution of a misdemeanor arrest warrant by two Boston University campus 529 police officers (campus police) acting as special State police officers pursuant to their appointment under GL c. 22C, § 63. ...

Commonwealth v. Edwards

... [2] 717 On appeal, the defendant's primary claim is that the police lacked the authority to stop him, as he had, at most, committed only a completed misdemeanor and, therefore, the police needed to secure a warrant for his arrest prior to stopping his motor vehicle. [3] We affirm. ...