<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[2010 - Stephen Neyman]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/categories/2010/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/categories/2010/</link>
        <description><![CDATA[Stephen Neyman's Website]]></description>
        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2025 17:11:57 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        
        <language>en-us</language>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Open and Gross Lewdness to be dismissed against Haverhill chemist]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/197/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/197/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Sex Crimes]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Concord District Court # 10-1281. The prosecution alleged that on June 7, 2010 the Bedford, Massachusetts police were dispatched to an address for a report of an indecent exposure. Upon meeting with the victim officer learned that a man fitting the defendant’s description drove up to her, called out to her and asked her to&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Concord District Court # 10-1281. The prosecution alleged that on June 7, 2010 the Bedford, Massachusetts police were dispatched to an address for a report of an indecent exposure. Upon meeting with the victim officer learned that a man fitting the defendant’s description drove up to her, called out to her and asked her to approach his vehicle. Upon doing so she observed the defendant pleasuring himself. The man ejaculated. The victim obtained his license plates and eventually the defendant was identified through a photographic array using Registry of Motor Vehicle photos. Attorney Neyman was able to get this case continued without a finding. If the defendant remains free from trouble for a year the case will be dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of making Obscene and Harassing Telephone Calls not issued against college student after Clerk’s Hearing]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/198/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/198/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Sex Crimes]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Boston Municipal Court. The defendant is a local college student as is the complaining witness. It is alleged that on October 31, 2010 the defendant and the victim became embroiled in an argument. As a result the defendant ultimately sent several text messages of a vulgar and arguably threatening nature. A Clerk’s Hearing was conducted.&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Boston Municipal Court. The defendant is a local college student as is the complaining witness. It is alleged that on October 31, 2010 the defendant and the victim became embroiled in an argument. As a result the defendant ultimately sent several text messages of a vulgar and arguably threatening nature. A Clerk’s Hearing was conducted. It was agreed that no charges will issue and that the defendant is to stay away from the victim for the duration of their college careers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Case Against Women Charged with Sexual Conduct for a Fee (Prostitution), Conspiracy and Running Unlicensed Massage Parlor Dismissed]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/199/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/199/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Prostitution, Pimping, and Soliciting]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Woburn District Court # 10-228, 10-2297. The prosecution alleged that in early August of 2010 Woburn, Massachusetts police received information that a massage parlor was being used as a house of prostitution. Officers quickly determined that the establishment was not properly licensed. On September 23, 2010 a law enforcement task force took up surveillance at&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Woburn District Court # 10-228, 10-2297. The prosecution alleged that in early August of 2010 Woburn, Massachusetts police received information that a massage parlor was being used as a house of prostitution. Officers quickly determined that the establishment was not properly licensed. On September 23, 2010 a law enforcement task force took up surveillance at the target location. The officers saw three men enter the establishment at different times. All were questioned once they exited. Each admitted to getting a massage and paying money for sexual services. Officers entered the premises and arrested two women, the defendants in this case. They were charged with Sex For a Fee, Running an Unlicensed Massage Parlor and Conspiracy. Today Attorney Neyman was able to get the charges against both dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Man Charged With Possession With Intent to Distribute Cocaine, 2nd Offense and School Zone Violation Acquitted After Jury Trial]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/200/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/200/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Possession With Intent to Distribute Drugs]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Middlesex Superior Court # 09-1164. The prosecution alleged that in April of 2009, based on reliable informant information it began investigating the defendant for drug activity in the Woburn, Massachusetts area. The information was further reinforced in that two years earlier police had witnessed the defendant involved in drug activity. Beginning in June of 2009&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Middlesex Superior Court # 09-1164. The prosecution alleged that in April of 2009, based on reliable informant information it began investigating the defendant for drug activity in the Woburn, Massachusetts area. The information was further reinforced in that two years earlier police had witnessed the defendant involved in drug activity. Beginning in June of 2009 the police conducted some controlled buys using the informant. On more than one occasion the defendant was seen selling cocaine to the informant. The drugs tested positive. With this information police obtained and executed a search warrant at the defendant’s home. Inside the home they found nearly fourteen grams of cocaine, cutting agents, packaging materials, scales and other evidence of drug distribution activities. The defendant was arrested and charged with Possession With Intent to Distribute Cocaine, Second and Subsequent Offense and a School Zone Violation. If convicted the defendant faced a mandatory minimum seven year state prison sentence. Attorney Neyman tried the case before a Superior Court jury. The defendant was acquitted of these charges. He was found responsible of the lesser included offense of possession of cocaine. There is no minimum mandatory sentence associated with possession.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Disorderly Conduct against Boston Businessman Dismissed Prior to Arraignment]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/201/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/201/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-7918. According to Boston Police, on November 6, 2010 at 2:11 a.m. Boston Police officers were transporting a prisoner to the station for booking. They were on State Street when the defendant walked out in front of the cruiser, blocking its path and obstructing the police. The police officers tried to&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-7918. According to Boston Police, on November 6, 2010 at 2:11 a.m. Boston Police officers were transporting a prisoner to the station for booking. They were on State Street when the defendant walked out in front of the cruiser, blocking its path and obstructing the police. The police officers tried to get the defendant to move out of the way. Instead, he started to dance. He was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct. Our office succeeded in getting the case dismissed today prior to arraignment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Domestic Assault and Battery against Brookline, Massachusetts man dismissed on day of trial]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/202/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/202/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Domestic Assault and Battery]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Brookline District Court # 10-0676. The prosecution alleged that on August 29, 2010 Brookline, Massachusetts police received a 911 call from a woman claiming that her husband had just tried to choke her. Responding officers spoke with the complaining witness who told them that she and her husband had been arguing all day. He then&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Brookline District Court # 10-0676. The prosecution alleged that on August 29, 2010 Brookline, Massachusetts police received a 911 call from a woman claiming that her husband had just tried to choke her. Responding officers spoke with the complaining witness who told them that she and her husband had been arguing all day. He then started drinking. The arguments escalated and the defendant grabbed his wife around her neck, threw her to the ground, ripped her clothes and continued to assault her. The police arrested our client and charge him with Domestic Assault and Battery. Today, Attorney Neyman succeeded in getting all charges dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Operating With a Suspended License against New York man dismissed]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/203/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/203/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Operating After Suspension or Revocation of License]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Dedham District Court # 10-1982. The prosecution alleged that on August 27, 2010 our client, a New York man was operating a motor vehicle in the Commonwealth after his license had been suspended. It turns out that in May of 2010 the defendant’s license had been suspended when he failed to pay child support. He&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Dedham District Court # 10-1982. The prosecution alleged that on August 27, 2010 our client, a New York man was operating a motor vehicle in the Commonwealth after his license had been suspended. It turns out that in May of 2010 the defendant’s license had been suspended when he failed to pay child support. He was served with notice of the registry action shortly after the suspension. Attorney Neyman convinced the district attorney to dismiss the case earlier today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Dismissal By Pre-Trial Probation for Local College Student Charged with Larceny Over $250 and Receiving Stolen Property Over $250]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/204/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/204/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Theft Crimes]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Boston Municipal Court # 09-7440. The defendant is a local college sophomore. The prosecution claimed that on October 8, 2009 Boston Police Officers were dispatched to a local high end retail store. They were met by store security who witnessed the defendant attempt to leave the store with over one thousand dollars worth of merchandise&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Boston Municipal Court # 09-7440. The defendant is a local college sophomore. The prosecution claimed that on October 8, 2009 Boston Police Officers were dispatched to a local high end retail store. They were met by store security who witnessed the defendant attempt to leave the store with over one thousand dollars worth of merchandise she had concealed in a large handbag. When the officers searched the bag they found the items and over one thousand dollars worth of items apparently stolen from other local retail stores. The police detective assigned to investigate the case contacted the other stores and learned that the defendant had in fact stolen the items from those establishments as well. Our office was hired yesterday to defend the case. Attorney Neyman was able to get the client pre-trial probation. All charges will be dropped after our client performs some community services and successfully completes her probationary period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Possession With Intent to Distribute Marijuana, School Zone Violation, Resisting Arrest To Be Dismissed Against College Freshman]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/205/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/205/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Possession With Intent to Distribute Drugs]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Newton District Court # 10-0714. The defendant is a local college freshman from another country. The prosecution alleged that on September 17, 2010 campus police officers were called to a dorm floor for a report of the smell of burning marijuana. They knocked on the door of the room where the substance was coming from.&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Newton District Court # 10-0714. The defendant is a local college freshman from another country. The prosecution alleged that on September 17, 2010 campus police officers were called to a dorm floor for a report of the smell of burning marijuana. They knocked on the door of the room where the substance was coming from. The police were permitted to enter. While doing so they found several packages of marijuana in the constructive possession of the defendant. They also found him in possession of a large sum of cash. Attorney Neyman was retained to defend the student. Today, he was able to negotiate pre-trial probation. If the defendant stays clear of criminal legal trouble for a specified period of time all charges with be dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Operating to Endanger Dismissed at Clerk’s Hearing]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/206/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/206/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Clerk Magistrate Hearings]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Falmouth District Court. As referenced below, on September 16, 2010 Attorney Neyman was able to get a Criminal Motor Vehicle complaint dismissed prior to arraignment. The case was remanded for a Clerk’s Hearing. We waived our client’s presence. Attorney Neyman was able to convince the Clerk Magistrate not to issue a complaint. The case was&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Falmouth District Court. As referenced below, on September 16, 2010 Attorney Neyman was able to get a Criminal Motor Vehicle complaint dismissed prior to arraignment. The case was remanded for a Clerk’s Hearing. We waived our client’s presence. Attorney Neyman was able to convince the Clerk Magistrate not to issue a complaint. The case was dismissed upon payment of a civil fine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Motion to Suppress Illegal Search and Seizure allowed after evidentiary hearing]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/207/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/207/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Search & Seizure]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Essex Superior Court # 09-0118. Our client, a Maine man was charged with Trafficking Cocaine in Excess of 200 Grams. He was facing a minimum mandatory 15 years in state prison if convicted. The prosecution alleged that on June 22, 2008 on officer patrolling Route 1 in Danvers, Massachusetts pulled into a Friday’s parking lot&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Essex Superior Court # 09-0118. Our client, a Maine man was charged with Trafficking Cocaine in Excess of 200 Grams. He was facing a minimum mandatory 15 years in state prison if convicted. The prosecution alleged that on June 22, 2008 on officer patrolling Route 1 in Danvers, Massachusetts pulled into a Friday’s parking lot and observed what he believed was a drug deal. He claimed that our client and his co-defendant were parked in a remote section of the parking lot, sitting in our client’s car. The co-defendant’s car was left unattended and running. The officer approached the defendants. He claimed they became aggressive with him. He then pat frisked both individuals and once he learned that the co-defendant’s license had been suspended and that he had outstanding warrants called for backup. Officers arrived and searched both vehicles. They found about two hundred fifty six grams of cocaine in our client’s car. We successfully moved to suppress the search on Fourth Amendment grounds. It is expected that the case will be dismissed sometime next month.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Allegations of Making Annoying and Harassing Phone Calls dismissed after Clerk’s Hearing]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/208/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/208/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Clerk Magistrate Hearings]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Newburyport District Court. The prosecution filed an application against our client, a local account executive. It was alleged that he was making obscene, vulgar statements to a woman via telephone on a regular basis. The act constitutes a violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 14. The woman complained to Merrimac, Massachusetts police who&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Newburyport District Court. The prosecution filed an application against our client, a local account executive. It was alleged that he was making obscene, vulgar statements to a woman via telephone on a regular basis. The act constitutes a violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 14. The woman complained to Merrimac, Massachusetts police who after a thorough investigation involving witness interviews and subpoenaed records learned that the calls were coming from our client. Attorney Neyman was able to get the case dismissed. No complaint will issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Operating to Endanger dismissed prior to arraignment]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/209/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/209/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Clerk Magistrate Hearings]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Falmouth District Court # 10-1736. The prosecution claimed that on July 24, 2010 Bourne police officers responded to an accident scene on County Road. Emergency medical personnel were present at that time. It became evident that a one car crash had occurred. A utility pole was noticeable damaged. The driver and her two passengers were&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Falmouth District Court # 10-1736. The prosecution claimed that on July 24, 2010 Bourne police officers responded to an accident scene on County Road. Emergency medical personnel were present at that time. It became evident that a one car crash had occurred. A utility pole was noticeable damaged. The driver and her two passengers were injured and required treatment at a local hospital. An accident reconstruction indicated that the defendant, our client had been operating at an excessive rate of speed. A criminal complaint was filed against her. The defendant lives in Ohio and pursuant to Massachusetts Rule of Criminal Procedure 7 we waived her presence. We succeeded in getting the case dismissed prior to arraignment. The case was remanded for a <a href="http://www.neymanlaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1370273.html"> Clerk’s Hearing</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Pre-trial probation for Somerville man charged with cocaine possession]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/210/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/210/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Possession of Drugs]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Brighton District Court # 10-1004. The prosecution alleged that on July 28, 2010 members of the Boston Police drug control unit were conducting surveillance of an individual known to them as a cocaine dealer. The man was of Dominican descent and working as a cook at a local restaurant. Officer saw the defendant in the&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Brighton District Court # 10-1004. The prosecution alleged that on July 28, 2010 members of the Boston Police drug control unit were conducting surveillance of an individual known to them as a cocaine dealer. The man was of Dominican descent and working as a cook at a local restaurant. Officer saw the defendant in the surveilled area making telephone calls on his cell phone and looking around. They then saw the suspect they were watching appear and make what they believed to be a drug deal with our client. Our client was stopped and found in possession of cocaine. Today, the day of arraignment our office succeeded in getting pre-trial probation for our client. The case will be dismissed in six months.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Gun charge with mandatory minimum, drug possession charge against construction worker dismissed]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/211/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/211/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Drug Crimes]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Lawrence District Court # 93-6752. The prosecution alleged that in September of 1993 a Methuen police sergeant pulled over a car being driven by our client claiming the manner of operation was “erratic”. During the course of the stop the rear passenger made furtive movements. Upon contacting the occupants the officer notice the odor of&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Lawrence District Court # 93-6752. The prosecution alleged that in September of 1993 a Methuen police sergeant pulled over a car being driven by our client claiming the manner of operation was “erratic”. During the course of the stop the rear passenger made furtive movements. Upon contacting the occupants the officer notice the odor of marijuana coming from the interior of the vehicle. The occupants were removed from the car and searched. The rear passenger was in possession of a knife. .22 caliber ammunition was located in plain view. The defendant, our client gave evasive answers to the police officer’s questions as well as a fictitious name. An inventory search of the car was conducted during which officers located a .22 caliber revolver. Some marijuana was found in the car as well. The charge carried a mandatory minimum one year jail sentence. The defendant defaulted. He eventually got convicted of unrelated federal charges for which he served time. Upon his release he retained our office to resolve the outstanding firearm case. Today, Attorney Neyman succeeded in getting the gun carrying charge dismissed along with the marijuana charge. The defendant pleaded guilty to the lesser offense of possessing a firearm and placed on probation, concurrent with his federal court probation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Possession of Child Pornography to be dismissed against Boston businessman]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/212/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/212/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Child Pornography Crime Defense]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-3442. The defendant is a Boston businessman who authorities say downloaded several pornographic images of children. The defendant was first suspected when his employer located the illicit material on the hard drive of his computer at work. A lengthy investigation ensued. The defendant was interrogated by police at his home. He&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-3442. The defendant is a Boston businessman who authorities say downloaded several pornographic images of children. The defendant was first suspected when his employer located the illicit material on the hard drive of his computer at work. A lengthy investigation ensued. The defendant was interrogated by police at his home. He gave a detailed confession. Attorney Neyman was retained to represent this man. It turns out that the defendant had previously been given a break and had a case continued without a finding. Today our office was able to get this case continued without a finding as well. Provided the defendant remains free from legal trouble during the time for which this case has been continued all charges will be dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Restraining Order against Lawrence man vacated]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/213/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/213/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Restraining Orders]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Lawrence District Court. The defendant is a Dominican man against whom a former girlfriend obtained a restraining order. The woman claimed that our client knocked on her door and when she did not answer he went around to her bedroom window. When she still did not answer he smashed in the bedroom window and broke&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Lawrence District Court. The defendant is a Dominican man against whom a former girlfriend obtained a restraining order. The woman claimed that our client knocked on her door and when she did not answer he went around to her bedroom window. When she still did not answer he smashed in the bedroom window and broke down her door. The woman claimed that she feared for her safety and the safety of her daughter. Our office succeeded in getting the restraining order vacated today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Domestic Assault and Battery against Kansas City man dismissed in Boston Municipal Court]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/214/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/214/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Assault and Battery]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-3864. The prosecution alleged that on May 30, 2010 around 4:15 a.m. Boston police received a dispatch for a case of domestic violence at a local hotel. The police arrived to find the defendant passed out in his hotel room bathtub. His wife was in the hotel lobby, crying and complaining&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Boston Municipal Court # 10-3864. The prosecution alleged that on May 30, 2010 around 4:15 a.m. Boston police received a dispatch for a case of domestic violence at a local hotel. The police arrived to find the defendant passed out in his hotel room bathtub. His wife was in the hotel lobby, crying and complaining that she had just been hit several times by the defendant. The defendant was from Kansas City and was in town for the weekend, watching the Royals play the Red Sox. Attorney Neyman was retained to represent the defendant. He moved for the first available trial date. Today, all charges against the man were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Charges of Larceny by Check against local psychiatrist dismissed after Clerk’s Hearing]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/215/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/215/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Larceny By Check]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Quincy District Court # 10AH1296. The complainant in this case is a lawyer practicing in Quincy, Massachusetts. He alleged that our client, a well known local psychiatrist had obtained his services in an amount over three thousand dollars. Our client paid by check and stopped payment on the check due to the attorney’s failure to&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Quincy District Court # 10AH1296. The complainant in this case is a lawyer practicing in Quincy, Massachusetts. He alleged that our client, a well known local psychiatrist had obtained his services in an amount over three thousand dollars. Our client paid by check and stopped payment on the check due to the attorney’s failure to honor his obligations under their agreement. He then filed an application for a complaint for Larceny by Check. Today, after a hearing the clerk agreed with Attorney Neyman that no crime had been committed and that the complaint should not issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Assault and Battery By Means of a Dangerous Weapon Charges to be Dismissed Against Lawrence Man]]></title>
                <link>https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/216/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.neymanlaw.com/blog-case-results/216/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Law Offices of Stephen Neyman Team]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Assault and Battery]]></category>
                
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>Lawrence District Court # 09-5674. The prosecution alleged that on October 8, 2009 the defendant went to his former wife’s home to drop off their child. Angered by the fact that the defendant was late for the drop off the complainant began verbally assaulting our client. She claimed that he then became verbally abusive and&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[ <p>Lawrence District Court # 09-5674. The prosecution alleged that on October 8, 2009 the defendant went to his former wife’s home to drop off their child. Angered by the fact that the defendant was late for the drop off the complainant began verbally assaulting our client. She claimed that he then became verbally abusive and threatening. The defendant then drove his car off, sideswiping the woman in the process. There had been a history of domestic abuse allegations between the two. Today our office was able to get the case continued without a finding. If the defendant remains free of legal problems for the next year the case will be dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>