Attorney Stephen Neyman is a Norfolk County drug crime lawyer and has been defending persons accused of crimes in Norfolk County for decades. He is often in Norfolk Superior Court and in Norfolk District Courts and is a well-respected drug crimes attorney throughout the county. His excellent reputation is the result of his favorable results and the hard work that creates them. Attorney Neyman is appreciated not only by those in the legal community, but also by his clients. When you retain the services of Stephen Neyman, you can rest assured that you are in good hands.DEFENDING CRUG CRIMES IN NORFOLK COUNTY
Norfolk County has several courthouses across the county. Norfolk District Courts are located in Dedham, Quincy, Stoughton, Wrentham, and Brookline. Norfolk County is located just south of Boston and the county seat is located in Deadham.
Other towns that are located in Norfolk County include: Dover, Norwood, Westwood, Medfield, Wellesley, Needham, Braintree, Cohasset, Weymouth, Holbrook, Randolph, Milton, Avon, Canton, Sharon, Franklin, Walpole, Foxborough, Medway, Millis, Norfolk, Wrentham and Plainville.
If you have been charged with a Norfolk County drug crime, the stakes are high and possible penalties could be devastating, including time in prison, large fines, forfeiture of your property, and more. It is in your best interest to consult with a seasoned Norfolk County criminal defense attorney as soon as possible to minimize the impact of a drug charge on your life, reputation and future. Attorney Neyman is a respected drug crime lawyer throughout the county and across the state of Massachusetts.NORFOLK COUNTY DRUG CRIME CASES
In Commonwealth v. Luthy, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 102 (2007), the Massachusetts Appeals Court addressed a situation involving a Norfolk County confidential informant working with the Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime Task Force (NORPAC). In Luthy, an officer of the Plainville police department and of NORPAC, informed an officer of the Attleboro Police Department that a confidential informant regularly purchased cocaine from the Attleboro defendant. The NORPAC officer arraigned and surveilled a control buy of cocaine by the confidential informant from the defendant. Additionally, officers from NORPAC, the Attleboro Police Department and The Federal Drug Enforcement Agency had the confidential informant conduct a second controlled buy. During this second controlled buy, officers surveilled the defendant leave his apartment, go to the predetermined location for the sale of cocaine, and return to his apartment. After these controlled buys, a search warrant was issue for the defendant’s apartment based on probable cause that cocaine, drug paraphernalia, transaction records, and drug related monies were in the apartment. The search warrant resulted in the defendant being arrested and charged with cocaine trafficking in excess of 200 grams and conspiracy to violate drug laws.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court held that there was probable cause set forth in the affidavit of the search warrant to believe drug or other related evidence from the drug delivery service would be found at the defendant’s residence.
The Luthy Court reasoned that for probable cause to be found in the affidavit, there must be a timely nexus between the defendant and his apartment, and that criminal evidence reasonably could be expected to be found there. Here, the Court inferred that the access to a large amount of cocaine on a steady basis and the fact that he was in the apartment immediately before and after the drug sale, was reasonable to believe the cocaine was stored in someplace other than the defendant’s automobile. Further, the court inferred that the defendant conducted business related to the drug delivery service in the apartment, that he likely concealed the drugs from his apartment into his vehicle and that there would be records related the drug delivery search in the apartment. Therefore, the affidavit did establish a sufficient nexus between the criminal activity and the defendant’s apartment to be searched and therefore, reversed the order allowing the defendant’s motion to suppress.
Norfolk County Drug Crime Attorney Stephen Neyman has extensive experience representing clients who have been surveilled by police departments and who have been subject to controlled buys by confidential informants. After being charged with a drug crime, it is essential that you consult an attorney who is experienced with handling clients involved in this type of situation. Attorney Neyman will look at the police report and the search warrant and challenge any potential illegality resulting from either. Also, he will challenge any illegally gained evidence in Motion to Suppress hearings. These hearings are essential and can potentially result in the drugs charges being dropped or the prosecution offering a lesser sentence. Attorney Stephen Neyman has argued countless motions to suppress evidence in courts across Norfolk County and is well respected among his colleagues.LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN NEYMAN, P.C. (617) 263 6800
The Law Offices of Stephen Neyman, P.C. is located in downtown Boston. Attorney Neyman’s office welcomes calls from Norfolk County residents as well as persons charged with crimes in every other county in Massachusetts. If you would like advice relating to your drug charge, Attorney Neyman would be happy to offer you a free phone consultation. You can reach him by calling (617) 263 6800 or by sending him an e-mail. Drug crimes require immediate intervention by an experienced criminal defense lawyer, so it is to your advantage to call as soon as possible. As Attorney Neyman’s office is accessible 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, he encourages you to speak with him today.