Taunton Stabbing Suspect Found Guilty

 

If you have been charged with a violent crime in RI or MA, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni at at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

Taunton woman found guilty in stab case
By CHARLES WINOKOOR

A Taunton woman accused of stabbing and severely injuring another woman in 2010 — in retaliation for talking to police about a 2009 shooting in Fairfax Gardens housing project — was found guilty on three of five charges this week.

A jury found Damaris Gonzalez, 26, formerly of 733 Somerset Ave., guilty of intimidation of a witness, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon (a knife) and assault and battery.

She was found not guilty of armed assault to murder and a second count of assault with a dangerous weapon.

The week-long trial was held in Fall River Superior Court.

Gonzalez was accused of repeatedly stabbing then 21-year-old Jani Desousa in April 2010, after Desousa had returned to Taunton to celebrate having landed a new job.

The victim, who had been placed in a witness protection program and was living out of state, was an eyewitness to a 2009 non-fatal shooting of a 20-year-old Brockton man visiting Fairfax Gardens.

Police said Desousa not only was stabbed but was kicked and punched by Gonzalez’ half sister, Jennifer Alicea, during the DeWert Avenue assault.

Alicea pleaded guilty to assault and was sentenced to two to three years in state prison.

One witness told cops that a large group had gathered that night to watch what they thought would be a fight between three women.

Read more HERE

RI Prisoner Charged in Inmate Attack

If you have been charged with a felony crime in RI and need legal assistance, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or visit the website for more information.

Convicted murderer charged with attack
Police say he stabbed fellow inmate in neck

By Bill Tomison

CRANSTON, R.I. (WPRI) - A convicted Westerly murderer, serving life plus thirty-six years, is facing new charges of attacking one of his fellow inmates while behind bars.

Victor Semidey was convicted in 2003 of shooting in the head and killing his girlfriend Tammy Chan as her teenage son watched. Now, he's charged with assault with intent to commit murder.

Rhode Island State Police say he got into a dispute with another inmate at the Adult Correctional Institutions high security building. He then plotted to attack the inmate by taking two pens, taping them together and stabbing the other inmate in the neck on Saturday.

The inmate got superficial wounds and was treated at Rhode Island Hospital. Officials aren't naming him.

Judge Pamela Woodcock-Pfeiffer ordered Semidey to have no contact with his victim.

At his murder trial, Semidey was a controversial figure, giving offensive signs to news cameras with both hands: "You got that?" he barked at photographers. He also freely admitted to killing Chan, with no signs of remorse in court.

Before that conviction, he'd had previous domestic violence convictions, as well as a conviction for slamming a man's head on a sidewalk.

Loaded Gun Discharges in Atlanta Airport

If you have been charged with a criminal offense involving a weapon, a felony in RI or MA, or a Federal criminal offense, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni, at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

Gun in carry-on accidentally discharged at Atlanta checkpoint
By Ben Mutzabaugh

A gun being transported in a passenger's carry-on bag was accidentally fired while it was being inspected by an officer at a screening checkpoint Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.

The Sunday morning incident began when TSA screeners detected a loaded .22-caliber Magnum revolver in a carry-on bag being taken through the security check-point by passenger Richard Popkin, Reuters reports.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution writes "while an Atlanta police officer responding to the scene tried to clear the five 'snake' shot bullets – small game pellet ammunition – in the handgun, a shot went off, according to an Atlanta Police incident report obtained from Hartsfield officials."

"I was grazed by a pellet fragment on the left side of my face," the officer says in a report quoted by CNN. "However, there were no visible injuries," the officer adds in the report.

The weapon was said to be pointed down toward a screening table when it discharged, according to CNN .

As for Popkin, CNN quotes the police report as saying he initially intended to put the gun in his checked luggage but decided to remove it because he was afraid it would cause that bag to exceed his airline's weight limit.

Fox 5 TV of Atlanta reports that the 43-year-old Popkin "was transported to the Clayton County Jail" and now "faces a charge of carrying a concealed weapon."

The TSA says the Atlanta incident is just one of more than 1,100 so far this year in which firearms have been discovered at airport security checkpoints across the nation.

And the Atlanta incident comes exactly a week after another man was arrested after he forgot to remove his firearm from his carry-on luggage in Memphis.

Read more HERE

ATF, ICE and Others Bust Firearm Ring with Roots in Mexico

If you have been charged with a firearm or weapons crime, contact criminal defense attorney John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

International Firearm Ring Busted
Alexandra Limon
November 9, 2011
An arms trafficking ring with players in Mexico and the U.S. was busted by ATF, ICE and other agencices.

In 2009, 33-year-old Gregorio Salgado Lopez was arrested in Mexico after hew as caught on a bus with more than 50 guns. He paid bail and fled to the U.S.

"Mexican authorities were assisted by atf agents in tracking the firearms to madera," said U.S Attorney, Benjamin B. Wagner.

The Department of Justice says the group bought at least 400 firearms at a local Madera gun shop. The guns are .22 caliber rifles, not typically used by criminals. It appears this operation does not have ties to Mexican drug cartels.

Three suspects were arrested Tuesday, and appeared in court Wednesday. At least two others live in Mexico, they and the others are still at large and probably remain in the Madera area. Including Demetrio Cortez Ordaz, authorities say he was the one who transported the guns to Mexico.

According to ATF, the group purchased more than 400 rifles at Pete's Sport Shop from 2006 to 2009 for the purpose of reselling the guns illegally, in Oaxaca Mexico.

"Right now were showing over six years and there were not that many guns so i have to take issue with their numbers," said Rochelle Noblett, the President of Pete's Sport Shop.

The store and it's employees are not facing any charges. The Department of Justice says Pete's did nothing wrong. Noblett says the number of guns purchased by some of the suspects, did raise a red flag. "Then i called the DOJ in california and i asked them and i was told they can buy as many long guns as they want," said Noblett.

Thisis not believed to be related to Mexican drug cartels.

"They're not the sort of semi automatic assault riffles or other automatic weapons that are typically purchased by members of mexican cartels. and we are not aware of any of these particular rifles being sold to members of the mexican cartels," said Wagner.

ATF says most of the rifles have been recovered.

Law Offices of Calcagni is Moving!

On October 31, 2011, Attorney John L. Calcagni, III will move his Clifford Street Criminal Defense Law Office location to One Custom House Street in Downtown Providence.

The move will provide Attorney Calcagni and his clients with an exclusive office location in Providence’s financial district, and most importantly, only steps from all three courthouses: RI District Court; RI Superior Court; and U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island (i.e. Federal Court). The building, commonly referred to as 'The Equitable Building', is a period-correct Historic renovation built in 1872 and one of the first buildings in Providence to use 'cast iron' for its facade. It boasts a very convenient location to restaurants, banks, the RI Attorney General’s Office; the U.S. Attorney’s Office; U.S. Probation Office; and the courthouses.

Attorney Calcagni will move officially on October 31, 2011 and will keep his current phone number of (401) 351-5100. To learn more about Attorney Calcagni, please visit www.CalcagniLaw.com or call him today.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Attempted Abduction and Firearm Suspect Released to Mother in Stonington CT

 

If you have been charged with a crime involving a firearm or other dangerous weapon, contact RI Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni now at (401) 351-5100, by email at jc@calcagnilaw.com or HERE for more information

R.I. judge orders man, charged with attempted abduction, to stay in mother's Stonington home

By Joe Wojtas

Stonington — A local man, who was arrested Saturday by Narragansett, R.I., police in connection with the attempted abduction of a young woman while she was jogging, was released on $20,000 bail today and ordered by a Rhode Island judge to stay with his mother at her home on Lord's Point.

The South County Independent newspaper and other Rhode Island media outlets reported that Matthew B. Klotz, 27, posted $2,000 in cash to secure the bonds. Judge Mary McCaffrey, who set a felony screening for Nov. 29, agreed to let Klotz leave Rhode Island as long as he stayed with his mother at 33 Hopkins St.

He cannot have any contact with the victim and can not possess any firearms. Meanwhile, police in Rhode Island said they are investigating whether Klotz has been stalking other females in Rhode Island over the past year.

Word of his release began to spread through Lord's Point and among local police this afternoon.

Lord's Point is the place where police said, in 2000, that the then-16-year-old Klotz broke into the home of an 88-year-old neighbor in the middle of the night and attempted to sexually assault her.

While Klotz denied the charge, he pleaded guilty to second-degree burglary and received a suspended seven-year prison term and four years probation.

In last weekend's incident, Klotz, 27, was charged with kidnapping, assault with a dangerous weapon and carrying a dangerous weapon while committing a crime of violence.

Police said a 20-year-old woman was near the entrance to the Point Judith (R.I) Country Club around 4 p.m. Friday when a man holding a dark colored firearm, grabbed her from behind and ordered her into his truck.

Narragansett police released the man's description and the next day, an off duty state trooper spotted the truck parked along the side of the road and saw Klotz walking toward it. When the trooper identified himself, Klotz drove off. The trooper followed and called South Kingstown police, who were able to pull over and apprehend Klotz.

Federal Criminal Attorney Defends Cocaine Trafficking Case in RI

If you are being charged with a Federal Criminal Offense, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni now at (401) 351-5100

Federal Defendant Receives Below-Guidelines Range Sentence in Cocaine Trafficking Case.

Local police, in conjunction with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, conducted a long term undercover investigation into a local cocaine trafficking organization. The investigation transpired over the course of several months and relied primarily upon surveillance; confidential informants; and a series of controlled narcotics purchases. Investigators learned that the organization had two main members: the leader and his designated deliveryman.

Investigators further learned that the men worked from two stash houses and utilized designated motor vehicles with secret compartments to hide and transport cocaine from their supplier; to and from the stash houses; and ultimately to the organization's customers. After a few months into the investigation, law enforcement officers received credible information to believe that the drug trafficking organization was going to receive a large cocaine shipment. Based on this information, investigators stepped up their investigative efforts and ultimately arrested the organization's leader and deliveryman, raided their homes and executed search warrants on thereon as well as the two stash houses.

The leader was arrested inside his home. A subsequent search of his apartment led to the discovery of a safe containing a .45 caliber pistol, nearly $14,000.00 in cash and a drug ledger. The stash home from which the leader operated yielded the discovery of approximately 1.2 kilograms of cocaine contained in various-sized individually wrapped bags and miscellaneous cocaine trafficking materials such as mixing agents, grinders, gloves, strainers, masks and cut-off plastic bags. The deliveryman was also arrested following a traffic stop.

A subsequent search of his vehicle led to the discovery of a secret compartment that contained quantities of cocaine and cash. The cocaine was comprised of 61 individually wrapped bags totaling approximately 183 grams. Both men were arrested without incident and subsequently charged with drug-related offenses. The men were thereafter charged federally by the U.S. Attorney's Office with forming a cocaine distribution conspiracy, as well as possessing with the intent to deliver cocaine.

Attorney Calcagni represented the deliveryman who was charged with two-count information that alleged: conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and actual possession with the intent to distribute cocaine. The deliveryman had no prior arrest record. This was his first offense. However, the evidence against him regarding these charges was overwhelming.

Investigators conducted a series of controlled drug purchases from the deliveryman as well as extensive surveillance. The crimes charged carried a mandatory minimum jail sentence of 5 years and a maximum potential sentence of 40 years. Based on the strength of the government’s evidence and potential punishment if convicted at trial, the deliveryman chose to plead guilty.

When a defendant in the federal criminal justice system decides to plead guilty, his lawyer's focus turns away from defending against the charged offenses and to minimizing the sentence to be imposed. Unlike the state system where defendants agree to plead guilty in exchange for a known sentence, there are no such guarantees in Federal court. In the federal system, sentences are a function of two main factors: the minimum and maximum penalties set forth by the criminal statute the defendant has violated, and an elaborate points system referred to as the sentencing guidelines. The sentencing guidelines factor in a defendant's criminal history and seriousness and nature of his offense to assign the defendant a numerical value or number of points which correlates to an advisory sentencing guidelines range. This range is considered by the federal courts, along with a defendant's personal characteristics and purposes for punishment set forth by the law, when imposing sentence.

In the case of Attorney Calcagni's deliveryman client, the defendant had no criminal history. He also pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute cocaine and conspiring to do the same involving cocaine quantities of more than 500 grams, but less than 2 kilograms. These facts gave him a sentencing guidelines range of 37 to 46 months in jail. In an effort to further reduce the man's sentence, Attorney Calcagni interviewed his client's family both in the United States and the Dominican Republic where the man was born and raised. Attorney Calcagni specifically traveled to the DR to meet his client's mother, wife and children, as well as his other relatives.

This trip enabled Attorney Calcagni to document the family's poverty stricken living conditions, as well as to come face to face with the deliveryman's loved ones whom he struggled to financially support. Attorney Calcagni documented his efforts with photographs and handwritten statements from his client's family that he presented to the court for consideration at the deliveryman's sentencing. Attorney Calcagni also focused on his client's legal U.S. Residency at the time of his offenses, and how after serving his jail sentence, the client faced deportation as a collateral consequence of his crimes, and would be forever barred from visiting or otherwise returning to the United States.

At sentencing, Attorney Calcagni argued that his client be afforded a second chance. He highlighted that the deliveryman was both a first time and last time offender who had already learned harsh lessons from his criminal behavior. He further argued that his client, a college educated, smart man, made a very stupid decision to traffic in drugs. However, though inexcusable, his actions were motivated, not by greed, but by survival for himself and his extended family, both here and abroad who suffered under poverty stricken circumstances, because the deliveryman, who after immigrating to the United States, had found little to no job opportunities due, in part, to his lack of job skills and inability to speak English.

Based on these collective factors, Attorney Calcagni successfully persuaded the Court to deviate from the advisory guidelines range of 37 to 46 months by sentencing the man to 30 months. This outcome is considered a great victory for the defense, which includes both Attorney Calcagni and his grateful client.

Wrongful Conviction Reform Essay

 

In the wake of the execution of Troy Davis under what appear to be questionable evidentiary circumstances, the following essay discusses the idea that changes can be made to decrease the incidence of wrongful convictions.

If you have been charged with a crime in RI or MA, contact Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

Thomas on Avoiding Conviction of Innocents

George C. Thomas III (Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - School of Law-Newark) has posted Two Windows into Innocence (Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 7, p. 575, Spring 2010) on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

Stories about innocent defendants who serve many years in prison before they are conclusively exonerated by DNA testing are by now sadly familiar. Although the reaction of policy makers has so far been strangely muted, there are concrete steps that can be taken to reduce the risk of wrongful convictions at an acceptable cost. This essay examines two relatively modest but important changes that some states have made and recommends that they be made more broadly. According to the Cardozo Innocence Project, the single most common cause of wrongful convictions is mistaken eyewitness identifications. States like New Jersey and North Carolina have implemented fundamental changes in eyewitness procedures that include keeping records of the procedure and requiring the eyewitness to indicate the degree of certainty. The essay recommends these and other reforms that will help protect innocent defendants. The other “window into innocence” is to permit criminal defendants to discover the State’s case in much the same manner as civil litigants are permitted to discover the other party’s case. Florida has had a liberal criminal discovery policy since 1972 without evidence of undue burdens on victims or costs to administer the process. Ten other states permit criminal discovery either as a matter of right or by leave of the court. Though liberal criminal discovery does potentially burden victims, there are ways of ameliorating that burden. One can argue that all defendants have a right to discover the State’s case but that argument has particular cogency when the defendant is factually innocent of the crime charged when defendants. When defendants make a threshold showing of innocence, the paper argues, the State should pay the defense lawyer’s time to take depositions of the State’s witnesses.

Military Abortion Policy Unjust

If you have been charged with a military crime or need help with a military board hearing, contact Military Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni for assistance now at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

ACLU Lens: Chicago Sun-Times Weighs in on Indefensible Military Abortion Policy

September 22, 2011
Amanda Simon

The Chicago Sun-Times today has a terrific editorial on a thoroughly unfair military policy regarding servicewomen who are the victims of rape.

As it stands now, the military provides health insurance for members of the Armed Forces and their families but, by federal statute, the Department of Defense is barred from providing coverage for abortion care except where a pregnant woman's life is endangered. Despite the fact that other federal bans on abortion coverage provide an exception for cases of rape and incest, the military does not.

Currently, there are more than 400,000 women serving our country in our Armed Forces. Each one of them faces a disturbingly higher rate than their civilian counterparts that they will be sexual assaulted. Denying them the same medical care that is available to the civilians they protect is shameful.

The Sun-Times says:

    It's time to reverse this absurd policy and, at a minimum, give servicewomen the same rights as any other woman covered by the federal government. That's why we're enthusiastically backing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would allow for a rape and incest exception. The amendment is expected to be offered in the U.S. Senate soon. We urge Illinois' two senators to support this basic act of fairness.

This policy is unjust and unfair. The National Defense Authorization Act should be coming to the Senate floor in the coming weeks and the ACLU will continue its push to see this ban repealed.

Wiretapping Debate Reaches Critical Point

If you have been charged with a crime involving electronic privacy or wiretapping, contact Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni for assistance now at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

ACLU Lens: Court Rules Challenge to Warrantless Wiretapping Law Can Proceed
September 22, 2011
Ategah Khaki

In a very significant development, yesterday a federal appeals court ruled that our lawsuit challenging warrantless wiretapping can proceed. The law that we’re challenging, the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) of 2008, is the most far-reaching surveillance law ever enacted by Congress. It gives the National Security Agency (NSA) virtually limitless power to spy on Americans' international phone calls and emails. It allows the NSA to collect those communications en masse, without a warrant, without suspicion of any kind, and with only very limited judicial oversight. Needless to say, the law has dramatic implications for Americans' privacy rights.

In the lower court, the case was dismissed on “standing” grounds. The judge ruled that our plaintiffs — a broad coalition of attorneys and human rights, labor, legal and media organizations — could not prove with certainty that they had been spied on and consequently didn’t have the right to challenge the law. A three-judge panel of the appeals court reversed that decision, and yesterday the full appeals court refused to reconsider that ruling.

The government now has 90 days to decide whether or not to appeal this issue to the Supreme Court. We hope that that they will decline to file a petition and instead allow the case to go back to the lower court so that a judge can finally consider the constitutionality of the FAA.

Felony Assault and Rape Suspect Arrested

 

Felony assault and rape are serious criminal charges that carry with them the potential for substantial prison sentences if found guilty. If you are a suspect or have been charged with a felony assault or other serious sexual offense, contact John L. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

 

R.I. Police Digest: Rape, assault suspect captured on Block Island
September 20, 2011
New Shoreham

Rape, assault suspect captured

A man wanted by North Providence police on charges of rape and felony assault was apprehended early Sunday morning on Block Island, according to New Shoreham Police Chief Vincent Carlone.

Named on the Rhode Island Most Wanted website, Jossie J. Gomez, 21, last known to live in Providence, was taken into custody around 1 a.m. Sunday by New Shoreham officers after a brief foot chase, and was taken by medical helicopter to Rhode Island Hospital in Providence after injuring himself when he attempted to flee, Carlone said.

Gomez was wanted by the North Providence police on charges of kidnapping, first-degree sexual assault and felony assault. Superior Court warrants were also outstanding for drug possession, probation violation and failure to appear for an arraignment on a charge of domestic assault.

Carlone said the police received a phone call reporting that a fugitive from justice was on the island.

Gomez was found at a rooming house on Water Street, Carlone said.

“While receiving permission to conduct a search, [officers] heard scrambling and saw the man running,” Carlone said.

While fleeing, Gomez jumped off a deck and landed on some lobster pots, injuring himself, Carlone said.

When Gomez was captured, Carlone said, “he had a substantial amount of cash.”

BRYAN ROURKE

Military Criminal Defense Lawyers Post Case Results

 

CHARGES: Larceny of Military Property; False Official Statement; Dereliction of Duty.

SENTENCE: Not Guilty After Trial

A U.S. Army Field Grade Officer received orders to PCS to a new duty station. Upon arrival, she was assigned and moved into government quarters. Notwithstanding this fact, she began receiving basic allowance for housing (BAH) at the approximate rate of $2500.00 per month. BAH is a financial benefit provided to military personnel to assist with the cost of living on the economy or in private, non-government quarters. The Officer continued to receive BAH for a period of 35 months – nearly three years. One day, while on duty, her supervisor approached her to inquire if she in fact was receiving BAH. The Officer replied “yes, but that it was subsequently taken out from her pay for housing.” The supervisor directed the Officer to contact the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to inquire into whether she was in fact receiving BAH, whether or not she was authorized to receive it, and if not, how much unauthorized funds she had received. The Officer complied with all of her supervisor’s directives and learned from DFAS that she had received nearly $100,000.00 in unauthorized BAH.

The Officer was charged with three violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Larceny of Military Property; Providing a False Official Statement to her supervisor; and Dereliction of Duty for failing to carefully monitor her monthly Leave and Earnings Statement (LES). These charges were referred for trial by General Court-Martial (GCM). The Officer was well represented at trial by the unstoppable defense “dream team” consisting of Attorney John L. Calcagni, a part-time U.S. Army Judge Advocate, and his colleague, Attorney Troy A. Smith, also an Army Judge Advocate. Attorneys Calcagni and Smith have a long history of trying cases against one another, as well as teaming up to defense Soldiers accused of crimes within the military. These attorneys make an unstoppable defense team and have a proven track record together of achieving success in the courtroom.

The Officer in this case elected her right to trial by a panel – the military equivalent of a civilian jury. The defense shaped the battlefield at trial with Attorney Calcagni’s heart-pounding and captivating opening statement. The defense characterized the governments view of the evidence as a “tale” and set the stage for its theory of innocence: the accused was unaware of the unauthorized BAH until it was brought to her attention by a supervisor; her reaction was characterized as “shocked, surprised, confused and YIKES;” she following all directives from her superiors, law enforcement personnel and DFAS regarding the BAH; had repaid most of the money by the time of trial; and had even assisted DFAS with re-calculating the outstanding debt to her own detriment on multiple occasions.

Once the actual trial got underway, government prosecutors presented several witnesses to establish that the Officer lived in government housing; was not entitled to BAH; and had received nearly $100,000.00 in unauthorized housing allowances over the course of 35 months. The defense team of Calcagni and Troy delivered devastating cross examinations to all government witnesses. In one instance, Attorney Calcagni turned one government witness – the Officer’s very own supervisor who brought her receipt of unauthorized BAH to light – into a defense character witness. Attorney Calcagni was able to have this witness testify unequivocally that the Officer was an outstanding military officer who was both law-abiding and truthfulness to the extent that she “doesn’t have a dishonest bone in her body.” In another instance, Attorney Smith virtually dismembered a law enforcement witness – a Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Agent – who obtained a sworn statement from the accused Officer.

Though the CID Agent characterized the Officer’s statement as a confession, Attorney Smith demonstrated clearly through his surgical cross-examination questions that the CID Agent lied under oath on multiple occasions and when questioning the Officer, was more concerned about characterizing her answers to accommodate his theory of her guilt rather than learning the truth of her innocence. Following these attorneys’ examinations and upon the close of the government’s case-in-chief, Attorney Calcagni successfully moved for dismissal of the Dereliction of Duty charge for lack of evidence.

The Defense put on a strong case at trial. Though the defense has no obligation to ever present a defense and it is the government’s burden to prove the accused’s guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, both Attorneys Calcagni and Smith are large proponents of presenting affirmative defense evidence at trial. Their shared philosophy paid dividends for the Officer charges in this case. The defense presented evidence that the Officer never checked or scrutinized her LES for receipt of BAH. They further proved, through the testimony of the accused, her husband and voluminous bank records, that the Officer did not carefully check or scrutinize her bank records or statements either. During the 35 months that she received the unauthorized BAH, she and her family had received nearly $100,000.00 in cash windfalls from unique tax credits and other forms of disposable income. The defense further presented character witnesses on the Officer’s behalf, which included a police officer, a retired Army Colonel who served with the accused Officer, a religious leader who was a U.S. Naval Academy graduate and retired Naval Commander, and a well-respected attorney and close friend of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. These character witnesses all testified emphatically that the charges against the Officer were ludicrous and beyond her capability. They further highlighted her outstanding character for honesty and law-abidingness.

The defense closed its case with Attorney Smith’s precision-guided closing argument. This argument cast a dark cloud over the integrity of the investigation into the Officer’s receipt of unauthorized BAH. Attorney Smith quoted the Officer’s spouse that his client is considered “the Forrest Gump of the Army” for not more carefully analyzing her pay or bank records, but that she was mistaken about receiving the funds; she was distracted with other obligations in her life during the 35-month period that she received the BAH; had benefited from a number of significant financial benefits during this time period; and did “not have a dishonest bone in her body.”

The carefully constructed defense by Attorneys Calcagni and Smith sent the panel into deliberations with one mission – to acquit the Officer of the remaining charges of Larceny and Providing a False Official Statement. Several hours later, this mission was accomplished. The panel returned with a verdict consistent with the evidence presented at trial – not guilty on all counts. The charged officer was cleared of all wrongdoing and fully reinstated to her unit and position within the U.S. Army.

The Crime of Armed Robbery

All robberies are felonies, however the addition of a weapon to the existing crime of robbery constitutes what is considered a Class A felony in most jurisdictions, punishable under very harsh sentences.

In prosecuting the crime of armed robbery, although the circumstances of the crime are always taken into account, sentences typically involve prison time. Keeping any previous convictions or charges in mind, an armed robber who is a repeat offender will most certainly be looking at some sort of prison sentence, if not the death penalty in states where it applies.

The circumstances of an armed robbery are likely to be one of the most prevalent mitigating factors in determining a sentence. Whether other crimes were taking place at the same time as the armed robbery; whether an injury or death occurred as a result of the crime; the kind of weapon used, and the severity of the crime are all taken into account for sentencing purposes.

Criminal defense attorneys are well versed in the different laws dealing with armed robbery and can provide you with the best possible defense. As a former military prosecutor in the U.S. Army JAG Corps and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, John L. Calcagni has a unique understanding of what process the prosecution will follow.

A situation where a death has occurred as a result of an armed robbery, whether or not the perpetrator intended to cause the death, is treated as a murder charge. Felony murder charges do not need to satisfy any intent criteria, merely show that the accused could have reasonably assumed that death would occur as a result of their actions.

If you are being charged with armed robbery, or another felony crime in RI, MA, or at a Federal level, you need experienced legal representation. Contact Mr. Calcagni at (401) 351-5100 or use the contact form HERE for more information.

US Service Members to Receive Civil Legal Assistance

ABA Military Pro Bono Project Offers Civil Legal Assistance to US Service Members
Posted Jun 1, 2011 3:20 AM CDT
By Stephen N. Zack

One thing I’ve learned as ABA president is that 12 months is not long enough to tell you about all the important projects we take on. I would like to share one project with you that relates to the ABA’s increasing advocacy on behalf of our fighting men and women.

Our troops serve our country bravely and deserve our support. That is why the Standing Committee on Legal Assistance for Military Personnel, or LAMP, launched its Military Pro Bono Project nearly three years ago. The project—supported by the ABA Section of Litigation and the leadership of the various military legal assistance services—connects income-eligible, active-duty service members with civilian attorneys who work pro bono on civil matters that go beyond services available through military legal assistance.
FOCUS ON CIVILIAN ISSUES

The project has established a national referral network of civilian attorneys who provide pro bono representation to our troops when military legal assistance is not available for civil matters, such as consumer law issues, landlord-tenant cases or child custody battles. Military attorneys can offer guidance and analyze these cases for merit and legitimacy, but are limited in what they can do due to practice rules and military regulations that bar certain types of in-person representation.

Cases have been referred from everywhere—Afghanistan, Asia, Europe and Iraq, among others. Intake forms are available on the Internet, so a case can be referred by a military attorney from anyplace with Web access.

Some state bar associations offer similar programs, but these seldom go beyond state lines and are not coordinated with the Department of Defense. The ABA project is the first one where the military’s legal assistance services have reached out to work with the private bar.

There is no model for this, no template. We worked together to create something that was needed but had never been tried before. And since its launch, with dedicated staffing of just one part-time attorney, the project has placed around 325 cases in 41 states, with more than 1,100 attorneys helping across the country. It’s estimated that these cases represent more than $1.3 million in billable hours donated by our attorneys to service members.

One example is Ken, an Army paratrooper who learned while in Iraq that his monthly pay was being garnisheed by nearly $700 per month because of a default judgment in a child support case that dated back five years to his training at Fort Bragg near Fayetteville, N.C.

The court documents, sent to Ken’s last known address, never reached him. Nonetheless, a North Carolina judge entered a judgment against the soldier, and the county child support agency moved to take part of his wages.

Ken questioned his paternity and asked for help from Army attorneys in Iraq. They contacted the ABA’s Military Pro Bono Project in Chicago. The Law Offices of Mark E. Sullivan in Raleigh accepted the case last summer and filed a motion that the Service Members Civil Relief Act had not been properly followed. In short, the firm got the judgment suspended. After a paternity test showed that Ken was not the father, the child custody office voluntarily dismissed the case and returned about $1,800 to him that it held in escrow.

The DOD is so enthused about this project that it activated a lieutenant colonel reservist to serve as a liaison between the services and the ABA, and to promote the project to other military attorneys. In October, the judge advocate generals of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard, and the staff judge advocate of the Marine Corps, thanked the ABA for “squarely addressing a need for pro bono legal support.” And recently, LAMP received the 2010 Support for Military Families Award from the National Military Family Association.
NEEDS STILL NOT MET

While the Military Pro Bono Project is a jewel in the ABA crown of projects that promote access to justice, the reality is that we are not even close to meeting the need. Many cases are grouped around military communities in states like California, Florida, North Carolina, Texas and Virginia. But the legal matters stretch coast to coast. The ABA needs more pro bono participation, especially in rural areas. We are looking to better answer the military’s call by boosting our resources. There are just too many cases in the pipeline that call out for help.

So during this patriotic holiday season, offer your support to our military personnel. Join the ABA member roster of attorneys at militaryprobono.org, and help service members with their legal issues. Or make a financial, tax-deductible contribution. Your support will transcend your community and our profession; it will help our nation. Our uniformed men and women deserve it.

For more information on the ABA Military Pro Bono Project or to learn how you or your firm can contribute, please e-mail militaryprobono@americanbar.org.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Ban on Gays in the Military Lifted by 9th Circuit

9th Circuit Bars Enforcement of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Posted Jul 7, 2011 7:32 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A federal appeals panel has issued an order that bars the government from enforcing its "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy on gays in the military.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Court of Appeals acted on Wednesday in a case involving a constitutional challenge to the policy, report the New York Times and the Recorder.

A federal judge had found the don’t ask, don’t tell policy unconstitutional in October and barred enforcement. A month later the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the judge’s injunction, allowing the government to continue enforcing its policy. Yesterday’s order lifts the stay.

The appellate panel noted two changed circumstances since it issued the stay last November, the stories say.

First, a repeal of the policy is already under way. Second, the Obama administration took the position in a different case on Friday that sexual orientation classifications should be subject to heightened scrutiny. The other case involves a 9th Circuit staff lawyer seeking health insurance coverage for her wife, the Recorder reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Former Defense Secretary Subject of Lawsuit

Judge OKs Army Vet’s Suit Against Rumsfeld Over Torture Allegations

Posted Aug 4, 2011 6:10 AM CDT
By Molly McDonough

A federal judge this week allowed the case of an Army veteran who claims he was imprisoned and tortured by U.S. military in Iraq to move forward against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The vet, who isn't identified in court documents, was working as a contractor for an American company as a translator in Anbar province when he claims he was inexplicably detained for nine months at Camp Cropper near Baghdad, the Associated Press reports.

The government reportedly suspected the man of helping pass classified information to the enemy. But he was never charged and released as suddenly as he was detained.

Citing court filings, the AP reports that the man's federal suit alleges Rumsfeld personally approved torturous interrogation techniques on a case-by-case basis and violated his rights by not allowing him access to courts.

In his opinion (PDF), U.S. District Judge James Gwin of the District of Columbia, held that Americans have continuing rights to constitutional protections at home or abroad.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Massachusetts Firearm Identification Card

 

The Massachusetts Firearm Identification Card (FID) is a requirement based on gun policy changes which were part of the Massachusetts Gun Control Act which went into affect June 1, 1998. As part of the new set of Massachusetts firearm requirements all new firearm license applicants must complete a certified firearms safety course or Basic Hunter Education Course. These courses provide one of two FID cards with varying requirements. A class “A" license to carry permits the purchase, possession and carrying of all ammunition, handguns, rifles, shotguns and feeding devices and in addition, permits the holder to carry a concealed firearm. The class "B" permits the purchase, possession and carrying of all ammunition, non-large capacity handguns, and all rifles and shotguns but does not allow the holder to carry a concealed firearm under any circumstances.

The requirements for obtaining a Massachusetts FID card consist of: being at least 18 years old (15-17 with parental consent), and completing a Massachusetts approved firearms safety course or basic hunter education course. The license is valid for a total of 6 years, after which applicants must reapply but are not required to attend the safety course. A restricted FID card is also available specifically for the possession of mace or pepper spray, which also does not require the firearm safety course. Massachusetts has strict penalties for being caught with an unlicensed firearm, and lawbreakers may even be subject to a 90 day sentence that extends to possession of ammunition.

Criminal Defense Attorney in RI

A recent Federal Court case for a RI client brought the result we had both hoped for...

“I am so immensely humbled and impressed by how you represented me before the Federal Court. Everyone in my family is extremely pleased with your work. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.” Mr. N.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Criminal Assault and Battery Can Become a Civil Personal Injury Matter

 

An assault and battery is a personal injury that is inflicted on purpose by one person or group of people upon another. For this reason, many assault and battery cases are not only prosecuted from a criminal perspective by the state, but are also then sued civilly for damages from personal injuries to the victim. This is particularly true when the accused has been convicted at the criminal level.

Under the requirements for assault only, no contact need occur, and under the requirements for battery only, no intention need exist - yet to satisfy the requirements of assault and battery, the accused must be proven to have intended to cause either fear or harmful contact, as well as actually commit the offensive contact in question.

The only elements that need to be satisfied in order for a battery to exist are measurable harm, either physically, emotionally, or financially. The elements that must be satisfied in order for an assault to exist are only that the intent to do harm or cause fear, apprehension, or discomfort, be clear to a reasonable person. Under criminal law, if a battery is proven, the victim can file for compensation through a victim's fund, as well as file a civil lawsuit for personal injury compensation.

Bail Petitions to Massachusetts Superior Court

 

Bail is typically defined as some sort of property promised to the court in order to secure a suspect’s release from jail. The agreement carries with it the understanding that the suspect will return for trial on the date specified by the Court, or will lose the bail initially posted, and possibly be brought up on charges for failure to appear as well.

In some cases, if a defendant appears for every hearing the bail may be returned at the close of the trial, whether the person has been found guilty or not guilty of the crime accused. Under current bail law, the court is allowed to detain a suspect prior to a trial based upon how dangerous they may be to the community rather than the previous criteria of being a flight risk. This is determined at a dangerousness hearing.

If you are facing a bail hearing for a major crime or serious felony in Massachusetts Superior Court then you need the assistance of a qualified and experienced bail petition criminal Attorney who will successfully and aggressively fight for your rights. Bail is not always granted and often must be argued for these types of charges.

Heroin Conspiracy Case Decided

RI Criminal Attorney Calcagni secures the following sentence for heroin conspiracy client.

FACTS:

Man was charged in connection with an international heroin trafficking organization. The government charges multiple defendants with being part of this organization. The matter proceeded to a jury trial and all defendants who exercised their right to trial were convicted. The evidence established that a group of men were importing heroin from Guatemala using body couriers. The couriers would ingest or swallow large quantities of heroin in the form of small pellets and board commercial aircraft bound for the United States. Upon arrival, the body couriers were picked up from the airport and transported to a safe house where they would pass the pellets of heroin. The organization then cut the heroin, repackaged it for sale in distribution quantities and sold it to a customer base transcending different states. The government’s evidence at trial consisted of video and photographic surveillance; thousands of wiretapped telephone conversations among members of the drug trafficking organization and their customers; airline records; seized narcotics; seized automobiles with hidden compartments used for transporting drugs; seized cell phones; seized U.S. currency; and drug manufacturing/distribution paraphernalia.

POTENTIAL SENTENCE:

Mandatory Minimum Sentence Imposed

ARGUMENT:

Attorney Calcagni represented one of the alleged body couriers. This man was convicted at trial and faced a mandatory minimum jail sentence of 10 years and a possible maximum jail sentence of life. In preparation for the sentencing hearing, Attorney Calcagni traveled to Guatemala to meet his client’s family. He visited them in their homes located in Guatemala City, Guatemala. He interviewed the client’s wife, children, siblings and parents. He also visited the grave sites of various relatives who had passed away during his client’s incarceration. Attorney Calcagni’s main purpose for the trip was to capture on film and with photography the extreme poverty stricken and crime-ridden conditions where his client’s family resides. He also used the trip as an opportunity to come to better understand his client, such as his background, upraising and life circumstances. Attorney Calcagni used this experience and information he gained throughout his Guatemalan travels to advocate to the sentencing judge that his client receive no more punishment than the mandatory minimum allowable by law.

SENTENCE:

Attorney Calcagni’s plea to the Court was successful in that his client was ultimately sentenced to 121 months of incarceration – 1 month above the mandatory minimum of 120.

Medicare Fraud Case Decided by US District Court

RI Criminal Attorney Calcagni reports on the following case results for a criminal fraud defense client.


FACTS:
A pharmacist was charged in U.S. District Court with two counts of Conspiracy to Commit Medicare/Medicaid Fraud. The government alleged that the pharmacist conspired with patients to purchase their prescription slips for narcotic and other expensive medications.

The pharmacist did not fill these prescriptions, but instead, accepted the slips in exchange for cash. He then used the slips to support billing requests he submitted to Medicare/Medicaid to receive payment for prescribed medications that were never dispensed.

The government charges that the pharmacist engaged in this fraud scheme with multiple patients over a prolonged period during which he defrauded the United States and Medicare/Medicaid Programs out of approximately $150,000.00.

The pharmacist remained in pretrial custody for nearly 8 months while his case was pending. Prior to being charged, he spent 6 months in ICE custody due to an order that he be deported from the United States because his Green Card had expired.

POTENTIAL SENTENCE:
The pharmacist pled guilty to this misconduct and entered into a plea agreement with the government that provided for a sentencing range of 18-24 months. Notwithstanding, he still faced a maximum potential punishment of 10 years in jail; 3 years of supervised release, a fine of up to $250,000.00 and restitution of $150,000.00.

ARGUMENT:
A carefully prepared statement for the pharmacist’s sentencing presented the extenuating and mitigating factors of family; economic oppression, loss of pharmacy license, business and assets; life circumstances, and other factors to the sentencing judge.

Attorney Calcagni submitted these matters in support of his sentencing recommendation on the pharmacist’s behalf that he be sentenced to the time served in pretrial custody. Both the government, who sought a sentence of 19 months; and the U.S. Probation Department, who sought a sentence in the range of 3 years; opposed this request.

At the time of sentencing, the Court approved Attorney Calcagni’s sentencing recommendation. The pharmacist was sentenced to time served; no fine; and restitution in the approximate amount of $150,000.00.

SENTENCE:
Medicare/Medicaid Fraud: Time Served.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Search and Seizure and Your Rights

In any law enforcement situation, you have rights as a citizen and person, and should inform yourself as to those rights. It is a well known and documented fact that the police or government may not enter your home or business with the intent to search it without a warrant or other formal court order allowing them to do so. If someone in charge on the premises is asked by law enforcement for permission to search the home or business, it is definitely within their rights to refuse entry and decline to speak to them until after speaking with an attorney.

If the police or government agents appear at your door with a search warrant you are to step aside and allow them entry, and the police may detain you there while they search. In every case the owners and residents are permitted to observe the search as it is conducted. When they are finished with their search, you should receive a copy of the warrant, and receipts for anything seized during the search. You need to contact an attorney immediately after a search by law enforcement.

You are not required to speak to agents however, and should remain calm if possible and avoid chatting nervously in particular. Government agents tend to have an intimidating and commanding presence, however they are just like you and I, and are merely doing a job. Decline any offers of an interview and contact your attorney immediately.

You may speak to them if you choose to, and place limitations on your conversation, such as topics you will and will not discuss, where and when you will permit them to interview you, and the length you will agree to. Remember that any statements that are made to you by government agents concerning leniency or agreements made verbally are not binding on the government and as such should be entered into lightly. Obtain any and all agreements in writing and in the presence of your attorney for the protection and safe-guarding of your rights.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

RI Organized Crime Charges Entered

Organized criminal activity is defined as groups of illegal activity enterprises centralized and run by criminals for the purpose of monetary profit. Organized crime defendants are charged on the Federal Criminal level, with typical activities consisting of extortion, hijacking trucks for cargo and goods, various forms of financial fraud, smuggling, bootlegging, and any other illegal activity that may generate financial gain. In order for prosecutors to sustain a conviction against a defendant charged with any of the crime related to organized criminal activity, they typically manage long, time consuming, and very explicit detailed investigations, involving inside information, and even wiretapping, to expose the criminal activity and gather enough evidence to charge the defendants.

The charges for those recently arrested from RI for suspected organized criminal activity have been publicly released.

Bail set for man arrested in organized crime sweep

Magistrate Joseph P. Ippolito Jr. of District Court set bail at $130,000 Friday for Vincent “Big Vinny” Tallo, who was arrested with 23 others in an organized crime sweep by state and local police on May 6.

Ippolito granted bail after a hearing. It was not known immediately whether Tallo was able to post the required 10 percent of the bail sum.

Tallo, 49, of 12 Poppy Hill Drive, Johnston, was charged with racketeering, organized criminal gambling, extortion conspiracy (four counts), bookmaking, conspiracy to violate the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, possession of a firearm while committing a crime of violence, and possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver it.

Arrested in the same roundup were three prominent mobsters, Frank L. “Bobo” Marrapese Jr., 68, of Cranston, Edward C. Lato, 65, of Providence, and Alfred “Chippy” Scivola Jr., 69, of Johnston.

Thomas J. Morgan

Second Degree Murder Conviction in Fall River

A conviction of second degree murder in MA can carry with it a maximum sentence of life imprisonment with parole after 15 years. Second Degree Murder is differentiated from First Degree Murder by the missing requisite qualities of intent and premeditation.

In the instance below, the defendant was given the maximum sentence.

Fall River man guilty of second-degree murder

A Fall River man has been found guilty of killing a man whose body was rolled in a carpet and dumped in a Rhode Island river.

The Herald News reports that Arnaldo Flores was convicted of second-degree murder Thursday in Fall River Superior Court and sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole in 15 years.

The 27-year-old Flores took the stand at trial and claimed self-defense. He and other witnesses said the victim, Osvaldo Martinez, went to Flores’ home in December 2009 intending to rob him.

Flores said he fought back. Martinez was struck three times, including once in the chest.

Prosecutors say Flores, his sister and her boyfriend rolled Martinez’s body in a rug and dumped it in the Sakonnet River in Little Compton.

Associated Press

Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni defends Drug Trafficking Organization Leader; Avoids Possible Life Sentence

Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni recently defended a Drug Trafficking Organization Leader. Strong arguments at sentencing he helps client Avoid Possible Life Sentence. See the case details below. If you have questions on Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.

CHARGES: Man charged by the federal government as being a leader of a large-scale cocaine and crack cocaine drug trafficking organization.

CASE DETAILS: Man was apprehended following a long term investigating involving wiretapped cell phones and undercover confidential informants who participated in controlled purchases of large quantities of crack and powder cocaine.  Man was ultimately arrested in his home when police executed a warrant for his arrest.  At the time of his arrest, the man was discovered to be in possession of several hundred grams of cocaine and approximately $70,000.00 in cash.  The man ultimately pled guilty to conspiring to possess and distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine, an offense carrying a mandatory minimum jail sentence of 10 years, and a possible maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

RESULTS: Attorney Calcagni went to extreme measures to gather evidence for the man’s sentencing hearing.  This included traveling to the Dominican Republic, where the man is from, and interviewing his many family members who live under poverty stricken circumstances.  Attorney Calcagni obtained statements and photos from all of the man’s relatives in the DR, and with these materials, presented a compelling case at the man’s sentencing hearing.  As a result of these tremendous efforts, Attorney Calcagni convinced the Court to sentence the man to 124 months in prison – 4 months above the statutory mandatory minimum.  Admittedly still a stiff sentence and grim reality for the Defendant, however; another tremendous victory by Attorney Calcagni.



If you have questions on Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Criminal Defense Lawyer John L. Calcagni III achieves dramatic results in Domestic Violence and Domestic Disorderly Conduct Case

Assault Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni announces results in recent case where he teamed up with Attorney John R. Grasso to Assist Alleged Drug Dealer Avoid Criminal Conviction and Deportation from the United States. See the case details below. If you have questions on Assault Defense or Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.

CHARGES: Man was charged with both Domestic Assault and Domestic Disorderly Conduct for allegedly attacking and verbally abusing/threatening his sister.

CASE DETAILS: The incident allegedly occurred at the Defendant’s and Victim’s brother’s home where the children’s elderly and terminally ill mother resides.  The matter was passed to trial.  Following a devastating cross examination by Attorney Calcagni of the alleged victim, the Court ordered a recess and encouraged the parties to negotiate a resolution. The cross-examination uncovered bias and motives to fabricate on behalf of the alleged victim, as well as prior inconsistent statements made by her.  Because of this fact, along with the unfortunate divide the pending matter was causing the family, the Court encouraged a resolution short of a judicial decision.  As a result, Attorney Calcagni successfully negotiated for dismissal of the Domestic Assault Charge and amendment of the Domestic Disorderly Conduct charge to straight Disorderly Conduct.   Thereafter, the Court chose to file this charge for one year without requesting or accepting a plea from the Defendant.  The filing was ordered while allowing the Defendant to maintain his “not guilty” plea.  No sentence or punishment was imposed.  Providing the Defendant has no adverse contact with law enforcement within the next year, this matter will ultimately be expunged and the Defendant will suffer no criminal conviction or adverse consequences from this event.


RESULT: Domestic Assault - DISMISSED; Domestic Disorderly Conduct reduced to Disorderly Conduct - FILED as NOT GUILTY for 1 Year

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Attorney Calcagni Teams Up with Attorney John R. Grasso to Assist Alleged Drug Dealer Avoid Criminal Conviction and Deportation from the United States.

Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni announces results in recent case where he teamed up with Attorney John R. Grasso to Assist Alleged Drug Dealer Avoid Criminal Conviction and Deportation from the United States. See the case details below. If you have questions on Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.


CHARGES:  two counts of Possessing a Class B Controlled Substance (Crack and Seroquel); Possession with Intent to Distribute a Class B Controlled Substance; Possession of a Class D Controlled Substance (Marijuana) and Possession with Intent to Distribute a Class D Controlled Substance; and Conspiracy.

CASE DETAILS: Attorneys Calcagni and Grasso have a proven track record of success for teaming up to defend individuals charged with the most serious crimes under the most difficult circumstances.  Here, the super defense duo represented a non-U.S. citizen, female who was alleged to have conspired with her boyfriend to conduct a drug dealing operation.  Police conducted a long term investigation, that led to the discovery of this operation with the use of confidential informants, surveillance, and controlled drug purchases.  Evidence suggested to police that the couple’s operation involved the sale of Crack Cocaine, Seroquel and Marijuana.  Police ultimately executed a search warrant upon the couple’s apartment where they discovered the aforementioned drugs in various quantities, multiple cell phones, drug trafficking paraphernalia and a large sum of U.S. currency. 

As a result, the female and her boyfriend were both arrested and charged with two counts of Possessing a Class B Controlled Substance (Crack and Seroquel); Possession with Intent to Distribute a Class B Controlled Substance; Possession of a Class D Controlled Substance (Marijuana) and Possession with Intent to Distribute a Class D Controlled Substance; and Conspiracy. 

Attorneys Calcagni and Grasso thoroughly investigated the legitimacy of the police investigation, search warrants and discovered evidence.  They also worked with the female Defendant to obtain a full biographical history, to include her immigration status, education and employment background, family history, and character references.  Following these efforts, Calcagni and Grasso successfully negotiated for the dismissal of nearly all charges, with the exception of marijuana possession.  Calcagni and Grasso further negotiated to have this particular charge Continued Without a Finding (CWOF) for 18 months during which time Defendant shall remain on probation.  Providing she successfully completes this probationary term, this final charge will also be dismissed in 18 months and the female Defendant will not incur a criminal conviction from this incident.  Most importantly, because of the charge (marijuana possession) and limited drug quantity she admitted to, the Defendant also avoids probable immigration consequences of deportation she would have faced had she been convicted of any of the other five drugs offenses with which she was originally charged.

RESULT: All Charged Dismissed except for Marijuana Possession.  Further negotiated to have this particular charge Continued Without a Finding (CWOF) for 18 months during which time Defendant shall remain on probation.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni has Shoplifting charges Dismissed

Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni announces results in recent Shoplifting case. See the case details below. If you have questions on Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.

CHARGES: Shoplifting

CASE DETAILS: Man was charged with shoplifting from a mall department store.  According to the store’s loss prevention agent, the man picked up a pair of earrings and left the store premises without rendering payment.  The alleged incident was partially caught on videotape; however, it was unclear from the tape whether man actually removed the merchandise from the store.  Further, there were conflicting statements in both the loss prevent agent’s incident report and resulting police report following man’s arrest.  Based on these collective factors, successfully negotiated for dismissal on this charge at pretrial conference.

RESULT: Dismissed. 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Military Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni assists Sergeant in Retaining Position after Article 15 and Separation Hearing

Military Criminal Defense Attorney Calcagni announces results in recent hearing representations of a U.S. Army Recruiter Sergeant in Retaining their Position after Article 15 and Separation Hearing. See the case details below. If you have questions on Military Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.


U.S. Army Recruiter Retained Following Administrative Separation Board.  

CASE DETAILS: U.S. Army Sergeant First Class Recruiter, with 17 years of service, was referred for administrative separation from military service.  The Recruiter was alleged to have engaged in an inappropriate and unlawful relationship with a female recruit.  The Recruiter's Commander initiated an investigation into specific allegations the Recruiter unlawfully took the female recruit to parties; invited her to his home; spent time working out with her at a local civilian gym; and engaged in romantic relations together.  Once the recruit shipped off to basic training, the Recruiter allegedly maintained contact with her; assisted her with going AWOL; and stating lies and falsified documents to conceal the alleged misconduct. 

The Commander's investigation yielded sufficient evidence, in the investigator's opinion, to substantive charges against the Recruiter for fraternizing with the recruit, making false official statements, and falsifying a leave/pass form.  The Recruiter was referred for Non-Judicial Punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The Recruiter's Brigade Commander served as the Article 15 Hearing Officer.  After reviewing evidence presented by the government related to the charges, and "allegedly" reviewing exculpatory evidence submitted by the Recruiter in his behalf, the Article 15 Officer found the Recruiter guilty of all charges and specifications.  Thereafter, the Commander relieved the Recruiter from his recruiting position and referred him for administrative separation from the U.S. Army with a recommendation that his military service be characterized as Other Than Honorable (OTH).  The Recruiter demanded his right to an administrative separation board and hired Attorney John L. Calcagni III to represent him at this proceeding.

At the hearing, the government relied upon both the recruiter's Article 15 convictions and related evidence to support the government’s request that the Recruiter be discharged from military service with an OTH.  Attorney Calcagni delicately cross-examined each of three government witnesses, all whom testified that the Recruiter had committed inexcusable misconduct and therefore, should be separated from future military service.  However, each witness conceded on cross-examination that their opinions and recommendations were based in whole on the Recruiter’s Article 15 convictions.

In the Recruiter's defense, Attorney Calcagni and his military defense counsel counterpart, Captain Jason S. Ballard – with whom Calcagni has a longstanding working relationship and proven track record – called two character witnesses.  Both witnesses, former members of the Recruiter's chain of command, testified that the Recruiter was a flawless Non-Commissioned Officer, exceptional asset to the U.S. Army and recruiting community, and should be retained without question for future military service.  One character witness further testified that decisions to refer the Recruiter for both an Article 15 and administrative separation may have been product of a biased command climate.

Attorney Calcagni presented further evidence that challenged the integrity of the Recruiter's Article 15 hearing, as well as the reliability of government’s evidence relied upon by the Article 15 officer, especially when compared to overwhelming evidence that exculpated the Recruiter from any wrongdoing.  Attorney Calcagni – in a bold and brave manner – also challenged the credibility and veracity of the Recruiter’s chain of command, many of whom had made prejudicial remarks to recruiter before and during the Article 15 hearing; testified inconsistently with the evidence presented; and apparently engaged in coercion or other inappropriate actions during the course of investigation leading up to and following the Article 15 hearing. 

RESULT: After sworn testimony from the Recruiter himself, and a passionate and compelling closing argument by Attorney Calcagni claiming that "perception is not realty," "members in uniform are not impervious to human weaknesses of misrepresentation, bias, prejudice and self-interest,” and that the Recruiter was “entitled to a fair shake” both at the Article 15 hearing and at his separation hearing, the separation board members voted that the Recruiter did not engage in the thrust of the charged misconduct and should be retained for further military service  in his recruiting capacity.  Congratulations to this Soldier!

If you have questions on Military Criminal Defense please call (401) 351-5100 or visit www.CalcagniLaw.com to arrange for a free consultation about your case.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Landmark Email Seizure Decision by 6th Circuit Court

The 6th Circuit Court, in a landmark decision, has applied the Fourth Amendment to an email seizure decision. The decision, U.S. v. Warshak, involved the secret seizure of the defendant's email from the Internet Service Provider, without a warrant.

Martin G. Weinberg of Boston, Attorney for the defendant, commented that in the 25 years the Department of Justice has been seizing emails with this practice, no appellate court has challenged it with the Fourth Amendment. He said, “It constitutes a seismic change in how the government is going to attempt to acquire the content of e-mails.”

John L. Calcagni, III, former Special Assistant U.S. Attorney and RI Criminal Defense Attorney said,“I don’t think you’d find an American out there who would disagree with the fact that we have an expectation of privacy in communications we transmit through e-mail. Because of the changing technology, the law itself needs to evolve. This seems to be a case where the justices in the 6th Circuit have addressed those changes in a way that is consistent with the protections of the Fourth Amendment.”

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Criminal Defense Attorney John L. Calcagni, III Files Appeal in Landmark Drunk-Driving Case

On April 1, 2011, Attorney John L. Calcagni, III was interviewed for a Lawyer's Weekly article regarding the issue of language barriers and the rights of drunk-driving defendants.

The article details a December 2009 case, wherein Attorney Calcagni represented a non-English speaking defendant who had been arrested and charged with driving under the influence. The decision reached by the Court found, based upon testimony by the arresting officer, that the defendant was aware enough to submit to a field sobriety test, but that the blood alchohol test was given without his full awareness.

An excerpted portion of the interview, where the interviewer questions whether Attorney Calcagni has found any case law to support his appeal of the decision, had this response, "I haven’t found much guiding case law on this issue of language and field sobriety tests. I did find a couple of cases in New Jersey that weren’t exactly on point and some that held weight against me, basically saying that driving is a privilege, and in order to obtain that privilege people have to give up certain rights, such as complying to tests on the roadside. Obviously, I will not be citing those cases."

When asked about his appeal of the Court's decision, Attorney Calcagni responded, "Appealing this case is necessary to “right the court’s wrong” and to ensure an even playing field for both English-speaking and non-English speaking defendants alike. Every man is supposed to stand equally at the bar of justice, therefore, the police should treat everyone equally both on the roadside and in the course of their investigations. In some instances, this places the onus on the police to obtain the assistance of an interpreter or bilingual officer. Where the police fail to take these steps to accommodate less sophisticated, non-English speaking defendants, the defendants should not be penalized by the Court. That is exactly what happened to Mr. DaLomba, and appealing his case is necessary to correct this error.”

The full text of the interview by Phillip Bantz, entitled Language barrier at issue in drunk-driving case, can be found HERE

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.

Assault and Battery case recently resolved favorably by Criminal Defense Attorney John Calcagni

A recent client charged with Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon and  Assault and Battery came to Criminal Lawyer John L. Calcagni for criminal defense. The details of the cases are below: 

CHARGES: Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon; Assault and Battery:

CASE DETAILS: Police receive a 911 call from an apparently frantic woman who has locked herself in bathroom.  The woman alleges that her boyfriend is out of control and threatening her with a kitchen knife.  The woman specifically alleged that he “is trying to kill me” and “put a knife to my throat.”  Police receive a second 911 call from same residence, but this caller is the man’s mother.  She too alleges that her son is threatening harm with a knife, had caused property damage by punching holes in the walls of the residence, and had chased his girlfriend out of the house.  Police respond and discover the friend in the street, visibly shaken, crying and upset.  Police interview the two callers and then place the man under arrest for both Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon (i.e. kitchen knife) and Assault and Battery. 

RESULT: Pretrial Probation - Successfully negotiated on morning of trial that man be allowed to maintain his not guilty plea and be placed on pretrial probation for 12 months.  Providing he successfully completes the probation term, the case will be dismissed and the man will suffer no criminal conviction from these events.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Law Office of John L. Calcagni III offers clients representation in the areas of Criminal Defense, Military Defense, Federal Criminal Defense, OUI Defense in MA , and Assault and Battery matters. John L. Calcagni, III is licensed to practice in state and federal courts in the States of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Florida, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Please call (401) 351-5100 to arrange for a free consultation about your case. If you cannot make it to one of our offices, we will to come to your home or detention center.