2019 Case Results

Below is a list of some of the favorable results we have achieved for our clients in 2019, most recent first:

December 19, 2019 

Ayer District Court

CHARGE: Distribution of Class B (Fentanyl). After a two year investigation, which included obtaining text messages and parking lot surveillance video, the district attorney charged our client with supplying the fentanyl that killed his best friend, who overdosed.  The district attorney's office was originally seeking committed time in the house of corrections for our client. 

RESULT: At the motions hearing date, while the district attorney's office sought a "guilty" finding and thus have our client labeled a convicted felon, we were able to convince the judge to impose a CWOF, which means our client will not be a convicted felon (and no jail time) so long as he complies with a two- year probation term. 

CHARGE: Witness Intimidation (felony). Our client was charged with interfering with an investigation of her son related to a kidnapping. As a Brazilian national, if convicted she would be deported. 

RESULT: On the day of trial, the Commonwealth was ready to try the case with five witnesses to testify against our client. Attorney Urbelis filed numerous "motions in limine" to prevent much of their anticipated evidence from ever being heard by the jury. After oral arguments on those motions, the judge ruled in Attorney Urbelis' favor. As a result, the Commonwealth then did even not have enough evidence to proceed to trial, and the case was DISMISSED. 

CHARGE: Operating Under the Influence. Police were called to a suburban area as the result of our client shouting threats from her car outside of another female's house, where she believed her boyfriend to be inside, cheating on her. The police officer testified that he arrested our client after he smelled alcohol on her breath, she admitted to drinking, was unsteady on her feet, and failed field sobriety tests. 

RESULT: After lengthy cross- examination by Attorney Urbelis of the arresting officer, our client was found NOT GUILTY. 

CHARGE: Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. Our client was charged after being pulled over for driving 75 m.p.h. in a 30 m.p.h. zone. 

RESULT: At the arraignment date in court, we were able to have the case removed from the criminal justice system contingent on our client completing a one- day safe driving course. After completing the course, the case is dismissed "prior to arraignment," meaning he was never formally charged and thus it will never show up on his record. 

CHARGE: Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol. Our client was arrested after being found sleeping in his car on the side of the highway. He was woken up by a state trooper, questioned, and it was very clear that he was under the influence of alcohol. He smelled like alcohol, couldn't stand on his own two feet, and threw up on himself in front of the trooper. He was asked how long he'd been parked there, and he said that he had driven from Maryland (and he had a MD driver's license) and parked there five minutes ago. Given that statement, the police arrested him for OUI.

RESULT: We filed a motion to dismiss. In this case, there was evidence that our client barely spoke English, was not provided with an interpreter (and thus his response was unreliable), there was no inventory sheet provided to show whether or not there was alcoholic beverage containers in the car, and other than his statement of "five minutes" there was no other calls or evidence as to when he actually drove to that area in which he parked; in fact, having been sound asleep, it was unlikely that he had only been there for five minutes. Therefore, there was insufficient evidence that he actually operated WHILE under the influence of alcohol. He could just have likely parked his car there because he was tired, drank a bunch of booze in his car (there was no inventory sheet to suggest whether or not there were empty containers located in his car) after shutting it off, and passing out. The Commonwealth vehemently opposed our motion. The judge agreed with us. Motion allowed, case dismissed.

APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL COMPLAINT: The Framingham Police Department applied for a criminal complaint against out 44 year- old client for providing alcohol to minors/ permitting minors to possess alcohol on her property. Her 18 year old son had thrown a party in their backyard, while she remained in her bedroom. The police arrived to 30+ young people scattering from the property, and some were found to be in possession of alcohol. Numerous empty cans and bottles were scattered across the property.

RESULT: We were able to provide evidence that while out client lived at the home, it was not her property. She was merely a tenant, and her father, who also lived in that home, was both the landlord and responsible for what went on in the home, and he had in fact given his grandson permission to have people over; not our client. The clerk declined to issue a criminal complaint against our client.

MOTION TO VACATE PRIOR CONVICTION AND FOR NEW TRIAL: Our client is a Guatemalan national. He has resided in this country since 1990. He is now 51 years old. Other than this conviction for larceny in 1999 (he was working at a Dominoes Pizza and there was a dispute over a few hundred dollars he was owed by his boss, so he took the matter into his own hands) he has had no contact with the criminal justice system whatsoever. He has four successful adult children, and this conviction was now preventing him from becoming a green card holder. He was at risk of being deported back to a very dangerous situation in Guatemala, where he knows no one. Hi immigration lawyers referred him to Urbelis Law, and we filed a motion to vacate this conviction and for a new trial.

RESULT: After the Commonwealth reviewed our motion, as well as various other documents we provided, they assented (agreed) to have our motion allowed, and the case resulted in a dismissal. Our client is now in the process of obtaining his green card.

CHARGE: Solicitation of Sex for a fee. Our client is an Indian national, here on work visa. He holds a Master's Degree in engineering. He was arrested after a State Police sting operation relating to the solicitation of prostitution. He then hired our firm to defend his rights.

RESULT: We were able to work out an arrangement of pretrial probation, whereby the case would remain open for six months. As long as our client writes a 1- 2 page essay reflecting on the negative effects associated with the prostitution industry, his case will end in a complete dismissal. He will not have to admit to any wrongdoing, and his immigration status will not be effected.

CHARGE: Assault with a Dangerous Weapon (gun)

RESULT: Case dismissed.

CHARGE: Reckless Operation of a Motor Vehicle Resulting in Death (Motor Vehicle Homicide). This case received significant media attention, as our client was just 19 years old at the time of the tragic accident, and the victim was a popular and accomplished 17 year old girl. This was a very sad case for both families. The evidence in this case, including that taken from the event data recorder (black box) in our client's truck, showed that he was driving 70 mph in a 30 mph zone, and at the time of the crash he had ran a stop sign and was traveling 46 mph in that zone, causing the fatal collision. After numerous victim- impact statements from the friends and family of the deceased, the District Attorney's Office recommended that our client be sentenced to 2.5 years in jail, 18 months of which should be served with the balance suspended for 5 years of probation, followed by 6 months of house arrest and other conditions.

RESULT: After numerous hearings and arguments, we were able to have this case resolved with a sentence of 6 months to be served in jail at "the farm" allowing our client to work during the day through a pre-release program and be eligible for parole after just 90 days, with a suspended 1 year sentence hanging over his head during the court of 3 years of probation. He will lose his license for 15 years, perform community service, and attend a safe driving course.

CHARGES: Reckless Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Disorderly Conduct. The Chelsea Police were called to the scene on reports of our client operating erratically and screaming at other cars. When the police arrived, they attempted to pull our client over in traffic, but state that she continued to operate erratically through traffic, screaming at the police. The police also observed our client to have the smell of an alcoholic beverage coming from her breath. Our client also has a previous OUI on her record.

RESULT: We were able to resolve this case with a general continuance (no admission of wrongdoing) whereby so long as she attends a safe driving course and maintains employment, the case will be dismissed outright with no effect on her license or auto insurance.

RESULT: Case dismissed over the Commonwealth's objection.

APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL COMPLAINT: The Boston Police Department applied for a felony complaint against our client for Insurance Fraud. He had filed a report with his insurance company claiming that his car had been side swiped while parked, resulting in total loss. The insurance company utilized their accident reconstruction team and determined that the loss could not have come as our client claimed. Our client then hired Urbelis Law, as he was a professional hockey player and would have difficulty returning to Boston during the season to deal with a criminal case.

RESULT: Attorney Urbelis who was to resolve resolve the matter with the insurance company upon our client's payment of the investigative costs of the reconstruction team, in exchange for the Boston Police Department's withdrawal of their application for a felony criminal complaint.

MOTION TO VACATE PRIOR CONVICTION AND FOR NEW TRIAL: Our client, now 61 years old, pled guilty to conspiracy to violate the drug laws in 1996. More than 20 years later, she recently applied for citizenship, and was denied due to this criminal conviction. She has been living in the United States since 1980, raised 5 successful children who are now adults with their own kids, and she was devastated by this inability to become a U.S. citizen, which had always been her dream. She then hired Urbelis Law. We investigated the case, found that her court- appointed lawyer in 1996 did not provide sufficient representation, and we filed a motion to vacate her guilty plea. We were vehemently opposed by the district attorney's office.

RESULT: The judge allowed our motion. Our client's guilty plea was vacated, and she now has the opportunity to reapply for citizenship.

APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL COMPLAINT: The Everett Police Department cited our client for Permitting and Unlicensed Operator to operate his company vehicle (criminal offense) and a weight violation for his trailer (civil infraction). He then hired Urbelis Law, as these violations had significant consequences for his commercial driver's license and the ability to operate his business. We then applied for a clerk magistrate's hearing before a criminal complaint was formally issued, and we represented him that that hearing. We provided evidence that both charged offenses were not supported by probable cause.

RESULT: The magistrate agreed that there was insufficient evidence to issue a complaint, and our client was found to be not responsible on both charges. Therefore, his driver's license and insurance will not be negatively impacted in any way.

CHARGE: Operating Under the Influence of Drugs (Diazepam). At trial, police testified to their observations after responding to a motor vehicle crash. Our client was found to have rear- ended another vehicle on the off- ramp of the Mass Pike. Our client's airbags were deployed, and officers found prescription diazepam pills in the car. Our client admitted to taking the pills, and showed signs of being unsteady on his feet, slurring his speech, and appearing confused. He was taken to the hospital for treatment.

RESULT: After the close of the government's case at trial, Attorney Urbelis moved for a required finding of NOT GUILTY, as the government had failed to meet the requirements under the law. This motion was allowed, and our client was acquitted of the charge.

CHARGE: Possession of liquor by person under 21; Possession/ use of false RMV document; Open Container violation. Our client, a 20 year old college student from Connecticut, was staying in Nantucket for the summer. One Saturday, he walked off of a "party bus" onto the street while holding an open beer, and was approached by an undercover officer. The officer quickly learned that in addition to illegally holding an open container of alcohol on a public street, our client was also underage, and a search of his wallet revealed a fake ID. His Connecticut attorney quickly reached out to Attorney Urbelis. The young man's family hired our firm and flew Attorney Urbelis to the island immediately, to handle the criminal matter.

RESULT: Attorney Urbelis was able to take this case OUT of the criminal justice system altogether, prior to arraignment. As long as our client attends some alcohol awareness classes and stays out of trouble for six months, there will be no record whatsoever that he was ever even charged with these offenses at all. This case was diverted prior to arraignment.

CHARGE: Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. Our client was arrested for Operating Under the Influence and Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. After a review of the police report, application for criminal complaint, and the criminal complaint itself, we determined that she never should have even been charged with Negligent Operation. We filed a Motion to Dismiss that charge, which was opposed by the prosecution, and scheduled the motion for oral arguments.

RESULT: After oral arguments, our motion to dismiss the Negligent Operation charged was ALLOWED. With that charge dismissed, we now look forward to a jury trial on the only count that remains, that being Operating Under the Influence.

CHARGES: Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol, 2nd offense; Reckless Operation of a Motor Vehicle. The Salem Police Department were dispatched to a significant one- car crash. Our client, the operator of the vehicle, as well as his girlfriend in the passenger seat, had to be removed from the car. Both airbags had been deployed, and the car was totaled. Our client was speeding and had driven the car straight into a parked car on the side of the road. The investigating officer believed both my client and his girlfriend to be under the influence of alcohol. With respect to our client, the officer testified at trial that he smelled of an alcoholic beverage, had bloodshot and glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He also testified that our client was unsteady on his feet and failed two field sobriety tests. At trial, on cross- examination, Attorney Urbelis discredited much of the investigation and observations made by the arresting officer.

TRIAL VERDICT: We obtained the best outcome we could have hoped for, with a NOT GUILTY on the most significant charge of operating under the influence of alcohol (2nd offense). Our client was found guilty of reckless operation, lost his license for 60 days, and was placed on administrative probation (will not have to report) for one year.

CHARGE: RAPE. Our client was originally charged with raping his estranged wife. The District Attorney's Office amended the charge to Indecent Assault and Battery to keep the matter in the district court, but the case went forward on the allegations that our client forcibly raped his wife while they were separated. His estranged wife testified at the bench trial. Attorney Urbelis cross- examined her, exposing her inconsistent statements, the lack of evidence presented that one might expect in this case, and her motive to lie due to the ongoing contentious divorce case involving custody of their 11 year old son.

TRIAL VERDICT: Not guilty. Needless to say, our client is extremely relieved.

MOTION TO VACATE CONVICTION AND FOR NEW TRIAL: Our client, a Colombian national who came to this country at the age of 11, pled guilty to possession of burglarious tools in 2005 when he was 19 years old. Now, at 33 years old, he is married with two children, a third on the way, and owns his own business. He recently learned that he cannot get legal permanent residency, and is at risk of deportation. The potential of leaving behind his entire family was extremely concerning, and so he came to our office to review his case. We found that his court- appointed lawyer in 2005 committed numerous errors that amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel, and a proper handling of his case might have led to dismissal of the charge. We filed a motion to vacate that guilty plea.

RESULT: Our motion to vacate the guilty plea was allowed. The case was dismissed. Our client is no longer facing deportation and may apply to become a legal permanent resident.

CHARGE: Assault and Battery on a Household/ Family Member.

RESULT: Dismissed.

CHARGES: Possession of a Class B substance (cocaine), operating with a suspended license. Our client was charged with these offenses after being found asleep in the driver's seat of her car on the side of the road. While police conducted a wellness check, they discovered that our client's license was suspended, and also observed a small baggie of cocaine in a cup holder.

RESULT: We were able to work with the Suffolk County District Attorney's office to postpone her arraignment (initial appearance) on these charges. We agreed that my client would attend 5 NA (narcotics anonymous) meetings and so long as she tested clean for drugs prior to that arraignment date, she would not even be formally charged. That's exactly what happened, and the case was dismissed prior to arraignment. There is no record of her ever being charged with this offense.

MOTION TO VACATE CONVICTION AND FOR NEW TRIAL: Our client, an undocumented immigrant from Guatemala, fled to the United States in 2009 with his wife, to whom he is still married. He fled from violent conditions where innocent people were being killed, including his mother and father in law. In 2015, he pled guilty to domestic assault and battery on his wife, as his court- appointed lawyer informed him that doing so was the only way to avoid going to jail. In 2018, he learned that this conviction was preventing him from obtaining a work permit and might cause his deportation. If that happened, he would leave behind his wife, who cannot read or write in any language, and does not speak English, to fend for herself. He would also be sent back to very dangerous circumstances. He then hired our firm to see if we could help. After reviewing his case, we determined that his court- appointed attorney was ineffective as a matter of law. He performed no independent investigation, and since the lawyer did not speak any Spanish he was unable to effectively communicate with our client at any time except on scheduled court dates in the presence of a court- certified interpreter. Had the attorney done the minimal amount of work of a competent defense attorney, he would have learned that our client's wife was always willing to invoke her marital privilege and not testify against our client. Without her testimony, there was insufficient evidence to convict our client, and the case would have eventually been dismissed. We filed a motion to vacate our client's guilty plea.

RESULT: After the government put forth an aggressive opposition to our motion, Attorney Urbelis rebutted each of their legal arguments, enough for the court to ALLOW OUR MOTION. Our client now does not have a conviction on his record, and is not in deportation proceedings. The government does, however, plan to re-prosecute our client, but we remain confident that they will have insufficient evidence to do so this time around.

INDICTMENTS: Conspiracy to commit larceny over $1200, conspiracy to utter false checks. Our client was 19 years old at the time she was indicted for these felonies. She took part in a "card cracking" scheme that defrauded numerous banks over a period of a year. She was a nursing student pursuing her bachelor's degree when she regrettably got involved with this scheme.

RESULT: After two years of litigating this case, we were able to reach a resolution whereby our client would plead guilty to one misdemeanor of conspiracy to commit larceny under $1200, and the uttering false checks indictment would be dismissed. Our client will serve one year of probation and have to pay back restitution in the amount of $500, which is the amount that could directly be traced to her specific actions.

CHARGE: Our client was arrested for operating with a suspended license for operating under the influence. This particular charge carries a sixty day minimum mandatory sentence in jail; the judge has no discretion.

RESULT: After hiring us, we were able to have the charge amended to simple operating after suspension, as our client was improperly charged under the statute. The case was dismissed upon the payment of court costs.

MOTION TO VACATE ADMISSION AND FOR NEW TRIAL: Client was referred to us by his immigration attorney. A Dominican national, he was facing deportation as the result of a 2006 plea to possession with intent to distribute marijuana. We reviewed his case and filed a motion to vacate that guilty plea on the grounds that his prior counsel was ineffective as a matter of law.

RESULT: Our motion was allowed, and the district attorney's office declined to reprosecute the case. Our client is no longer in deportation proceedings.

CHARGE: Our client, a 17 year old high school senior, was arrested at the St. Patrick's Day parade in South Boston for being a minor transporting alcohol. He had a lot to lose, including his scholarship to a major University where he was scheduled to enroll in the fall. His father retained our services.

RESULT: We were able to have this case resolved prior to a formal criminal complaint issuing in court. Had that happened, regardless of the eventual outcome, our client would have had a record on his CARI. Now, there is no record whatsoever, and our client will be able to move forward with his life. (He was, however, grounded by Dad for the remainder of the school year).

CHARGE: Leaving the Scene of Property Damage. Our client was charged for fleeing the scene of an accident after causing damage to another's vehicle without exchanging identification or registration information, as required by law. An investigation revealed the other vehicle's paint left on our client's vehicle, and our client admitted to being the driver. She subsequently hired our firm.

RESULT: We were eventually able to resolve this matter without any conviction, or even any admission (such as a CWOF) to the offense. So long as our client remains out of trouble for one year, the case will end in a complete dismissal without any adverse finding or license loss. We fully expect our client to remain problem- free for that one year, as she is a successful business executive with no prior record whatsoever.

APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL COMPLAINT: Boston Detectives applied for a complaint against our client, a 23 year old recent college graduate now applying to grad school, for passing a fake ID to her 20 year old friend at a bar. The Detectives testified before a clerk magistrate that our client was one of the most rude, drunk, and offensive suspects they'd dealt with in quite some time.

RESULT: After a full hearing, the clerk declined to issue a formal criminal complaint against our client.

CHARGE: Operating Under the Influence, 2nd offense. We took this case to trial. The arresting state trooper testified that when he observed our client was operating on the highway at 1am without his lights on, he signaled for him to pull over. He testified that our client had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and stunk of booze. He also testified that our client was uncooperative, unsteady on his feet after exiting the cruiser, and appeared to be "drunk." Attorney Urbelis attacked all facets of the trooper's investigation through cross examination.

RESULT: Not Guilty verdict. After the acquittal, we filed a motion for immediate reinstatement of our client's license, which had been suspended for 3 years due to his refusal to take a breath test after the arrest. The prosecution opposed our motion. After the judge heard oral arguments, he allowed our motion; our client is now fully licensed again.

MOTION TO VACATE GUILTY PLEA AND DISMISS CASE: We filed our motion to vacate our client's guilty plea and set the matter for a hearing in front of the First Justice of Lawrence District Court. The Commonwealth filed a written opposition to our motion, and each side made oral argument. The guilty plea from 2006, as it stood, was now causing our client, a Guatemalan national, to face deportation.

RESULT: Motion allowed, case dismissed. Our client is no longer facing deportation.

MOTION TO REVISE AND REVOKE PRIOR SENTENCE: Our client, a non- citizen, came to our office after being referred to us by his immigration attorney. In 2015, he pled guilty to two charges and was sentenced to probation with conditions. As it turns out, his court- appointed attorney at that time did not properly investigate the impact that such sentence would have on our client's immigration status. Our client was now facing deportation as a result of that sentence. After he hired us, we filed a motion to vacate those guilty pleas and for new trial on a number of legal grounds. After the district attorney's office reviewed our motion, we reached an agreement with their office to revise the original sentence in a manner that would NOT effect our client's immigration status.

RESULT: The court allowed our agreed- upon motion to revise and revoke the original sentence. Our client is no longer in deportation proceedings in immigration court.

CHARGE: Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol. At trial, a Massachusetts State Trooper testified that our client nearly caused a 3- car crash on Route 495, drifting in and out of lanes multiple occasions. The trooper also testified that our client failed to pull over when signaled, and did not do so until a while after the Trooper was forced to activate his siren. He testified that once pulled over, our client was unable to locate his registration, sat there looking confused, with bloodshot eyes, a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage, and slurred speech. He said that our client was confused as to his route home, and admitted to drinking beers throughout the evening. The trooper testified that after being ordered to exit his car, our client was unable to stand still without losing his balance, and failed multiple field sobriety tests. He testified that our client appeared "drunk" and that when being transported to the station for booking, the cruiser was overtaken by the "overwhelming" smell of alcohol coming from the back seat where our client was sitting.

VERDICT: After a lengthy cross- examination, Attorney Urbelis picked apart the trooper's entire investigation, which he later emphasized in closing argument. After just twenty minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY.

APPLICATION FOR JUVENILE COMPLAINT: Police responded to a compliant of a house party with teenagers. Upon arrival, police found our seventeen year old client and four other girls at the house with empty beer bottles scattered about. When questioned, all four girls admitted to drinking the beers. The police applied for a juvenile complaint against our client on the charge of minor in possession of alcohol.

RESULT: After a clerk magistrate's hearing, we convinced the clerk to NOT issue a juvenile complaint against our client. There will be no record of this incident moving forward.

CHARGES: Kidnapping, Domestic Assault and Battery. The Commonwealth called five witnesses to testify against our client in this jury trial. Essentially, we did not contest the allegations, but raised (and were permitted to argue) the affirmative defense of necessity, over the prosecutor's objection. While an acquittal on both counts would have been ideal, our mail goal was to obtain an acquittal on the serious felony charge of kidnapping, which carried with it significant imprisonment.

JURY VERDICT: Not Guilty on Kidnapping, Guilty of misdemeanor domestic assault and battery.

CHARGE: Domestic Assault and Battery

RESULT: Case dismissed.

PROBATION VIOLATION PROCEEDING: Our client was on probation for assault and battery. While on probation, he was charged with RAPE. This new offense triggered probation revocation proceedings. For this type of proceeding, the standard to find a violation is much less than the proof required in a criminal case. After a hearing, if the judge finds that it is more likely than not that the probationer committed the violation (in this case, the new offense of RAPE), then he is found to have violated the terms of probation and will be sentenced to jail.

RESULT: A lengthy evidentiary hearing was conducted, which included the testimony of our client's accuser. She described a forcible rape. On cross examination, Attorney Urbelis was able to establish her motive to lie; she and our client were going through a bitter custody battle of the son they shared in common. If our client went to jail, she would then get full custody. Our client also elected to take the stand and gave his side of the encounter; that it was consensual. After final arguments by Attorney Urbelis and the Assistant District Attorney, the judge found that our client did not violate his probation by committing rape. In other words, the accuser had been discredited.