Justia Lawyer Rating
Super Lawyers Badge
Avvo Badge
Massachusetts Bar Association

Search & Seizure

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights protects all citizens from unlawful and unwarranted searches and seizures. This means that law enforcement officials are prohibited from conducting a search and seizure of your body, home, or property unless:

  1. They have probable cause to believe an illegal activity is occurring, or
  2. They have a court-issued search warrant

If a police officer, state trooper, or a state or federal law enforcement official searches your property without a valid search warrant or without probable cause, any evidence he/she collects cannot be used against you in court.

If you have been arrested after a law enforcement official conducted a search and seizure of your home, body, or property, and you were consequently arrested, it’s important to contact an experienced Boston criminal defense lawyer as soon as possible. In these types of situations time is of the essence! Massachusetts criminal defense attorney Stephen Neyman will review your case and immediately begin investigating the actions leading up to your arrest. If he suspects the police or investigative agency acted illegally or unlawfully in searching you or your property he will bring it to the attention of the judge, and argue to have the evidence dismissed from court.

Motions to Suppress: The Best Weapon You Have to Attack an Illegal Search and Seizure in Massachusetts

Any experienced criminal defense lawyer will tell you that there is not better tool for attacking the district attorney’s case than through a motion to suppress evidence. Anytime there is a stop, or a search, or a seizure that first thing that we think of is the legality of the police action. If the search was conducted pursuant to a search warrant we find ways to attack the affidavit that was filed to obtain the search warrant. If there was no warrant we look to see if one should have been applied for. We will visit the scene to determine if the representations of the police officer are supported by the surrounding environment; i.e. could he really have seen what he says he saw or was he in fact lying and conducting his search improperly? Successful motions to suppress result in the exclusion of evidence. Usually, without that evidence the district attorney cannot proceed with his case. In other words, the case will get dismissed.

Contact Boston, Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney

The right you have against unlawful searches and seizures should never be violated! If state or federal law enforcement officials have violated your constitutional rights, Attorney Stephen Neyman will stand up for your rights and vigorously defend you in court. Mr. Neyman is has over 20 years of experience handling cases involving search and seizure law, and has successfully defended countless clients with cases of this nature throughout his career. As a highly skilled and experienced Boston criminal defense attorney, Mr. Neyman will aggressively contest any evidence submitted by the prosecution that was obtained during an unlawful search and seizure. Mr. Neyman is 100% committed to protecting your rights, fighting your charges, and helping you win your case!

If you require the services of an experienced, dependable, and knowledgeable Boston, Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer with a thorough understanding of state and federal search and seizure laws, please contact the Law Offices of Stephen Neyman for a free consultation at 617-263-6800 or contact us online.

Case Results » Search & Seizure
  • Petition to Seal Allowed for Car Dealership Owner Charged With Drug Distribution

    Our client owns a large car dealership in a Boston suburb. A few years ago he was charged with three counts of distribution of a class B drug in violation of G.L. c. 94C section 32A and possessing a dangerous weapon under G.L. c. 269 section 10(b). Attorney Neyman prevailed on a motion to suppress an illegal search and seizure and the prosecution was unable to proceed with its case. The district attorney's office filed a nolle prosse. Our client asked us to petition to seal his case under G.L. c. 276 section 100. We filed the petition on Monday. A hearing was scheduled for today and the judge agreed to allow the petition. The matter is now sealed. 

    Read More in Sealing Criminal Records 

  • Motion to Suppress Search of Cell Phone With Warrant Allowed After Hearing and All Evidence Suppressed

    On July 20, 2018 the defendant was driving his girlfriend's car in an upscale Boston suburb. Police officers pulled him over for driving twelve miles per hour over the speed limit. Officers asked the driver if he had any weapons or if there were drugs in the car. He responded "not that I am aware of". This heightened the officer's suspicions. The defendant then made furtive movements causing further alarm prompting the officers to have him exit the car. The officers then conducted a pat frisk of the defendant and found several thousand dollars cash in his pockets. The police then searched his car and found drugs. Our client was arrested, the car was seized as was the defendant's cell phone. A search warrant was applied for and issued permitting the police to search the phone. On the phone was a significant amount of evidence of our client's drug dealing. Attorney Neyman filed a motion to suppress challenging the lawfulness of the search warrant. Today, the judge agreed that the search was illegal. Consequently, all evidence in the phone linking our client to the drugs was suppressed. The prosecution will not be able to proceed with the case and all charges will be dismissed. 

    Read More in Drug Crimes

  • Two Counts of Possession With Intent to Distribute Class B Distribution of Class B and Carrying a Dangerous Weapon Against Salesman Dismissed

    Several weeks ago Attorney Neyman won a motion to suppress after challenging the validity of a stop, search and seizure. In particular we believed that the exit order was unconstitutional and required suppression of all evidence seized. That included drugs sufficient to charge possession with intent to distribute class B and distribution of class B under G.L. c. 94C Section 32A. It also included the knife charged as a dangerous weapon under G.L. c. 269 Section 10(b). Today, the prosecution agreed that without the evidence it was unable to proceed. The case was nolle prossed. 

    Read More in Search and Seizure

Client Reviews
"We went to trial and won. He saved me fifteen years mandatory in state prison for this case." A.C. Boston, Massachusetts
"I hired him and he got the case dismissed before I had to go into a courtroom. My school never found out and if they had I would have lost my academic scholarships. He really saved my college career." Melissa C. Cold Spring, New York, October 2013
"My union rep told me to call Steve Neyman. From the get go I felt comfortable with him. He took the time to talk to me about my case whenever I needed .... He even gave me his personal cell number and took all my calls. We won the case and I kept my job." Bart L. S.
"The best criminal defense lawyer in Massachusetts. Takes all of his client's calls at any time of the day or night. He was always there for me and my family. Steve saved my life." Jacquille D. Brockton, Massachusetts
"In less than two months Stephen Neyman got my old conviction vacated. I now have no criminal record." Paul W. Boston, Massachusetts