Massachusetts Criminal Trial Verdicts

Examples of Criminal Cases in Boston and Beyond

The attorneys at Denner Pellegrino, L.L.P., build aggressive and effective defense strategies against almost all criminal charges. We build on our lawyers' extensive experience, knowledge and their ability to prevail while under media scrutiny. We also rely on the considerable investigative resources of the firm to verify the facts and evidence presented.

21 Year Old College Athlete Acquitted of Rape

A Middlesex County Superior Court acquitted a 21 year old D-1 scholarship lacrosse player of an alleged date rape after deliberating for less than two hours. Denner Pellegrino attorney Brad Bailey successfully used Massachusetts' First Complaint (Fresh Complaint) Reporting Doctrine, an evidentiary exception normally used by prosecutors to help prove their case, to establish reasonable doubt in the case and help persuade jurors of their client's innocence. The defense also was able to successfully pursue a novel defense approach by using multiple Facebook postings and photographs for the limited purpose of rebutting the prosecution's claim that the complainant's demeanor had changed as a result of the alleged incident.

Negotiated Disposition in Largest Private Embezzlement Case in Massachusetts History

A former office manager for a Massachusetts construction firm reached out for legal counsel after having already admitted to the police that she had embezzled almost $7 million from her employer. The confession to theft and embezzlement was made during a video-taped deposition in a civil law suit filed by her employer. She then received written notice of her status as the target of a federal criminal investigation. Her maximum prison exposure was at least 30 years and, under federal sentencing guidelines, she faced a likely prison sentence of at least almost seven years.

Denner Pellegrino partner and former prosecutor Brad Bailey immediately contacted the United States Attorney's Office and began the process to negotiate a possible disposition. The parties first agreed to proceed via information instead of indictment. They next structured a plea agreement that limited the defendant's maximum prison exposure. When they did not agree on an appropriate sentence, Denner Pellegrino attorneys Bailey and Gary Pelletier retained the services of an expert forensic psychiatrist in an effort to convince the U.S. District Judge presiding not to impose or exceed the maximum allowable guidelines sentence. The U.S. prosecutor requested 57 months in federal prison.

Result: The U.S. District Court imposed a sentence of 48 months in prison, and agreed to place the defendant in a 500 hour substance abuse program at the request of her lawyers. Upon successful completion of the 500 hours substance abuse program, the office manager could be eligible for parole in 36 months or less. To date, the case remains the largest private embezzlement case in Massachusetts history.

Intoxication and Consent in Rape Cases

An appellate court case where the client was a Harvard University Graduate Dental Student accused of two counts of rape. He was convicted at his second trial while represented by other counsel. A number of issues were raised on appeal, the central issue related to intoxication and consent. The Commonwealth argued that the complainant was intoxicated and thus unable to consent. On appeal, attorney Brad Bailey argued that the trial court's instructions on the issue of intoxication and consent were inadequate and erroneous as a matter of law, and pointed out that trial counsel had repeatedly requested that the judge give an instruction on level of intoxication when considering whether or not an intoxicated person is capable of consenting. Instead, the judge gave a confusing instruction lumping together intoxication with sleep, stupefaction, insensibility, and unconsciousness. Attorney Bailey argued that placing intoxication in the same context as states of insensibility had the potential to confuse the jury into believing that intoxicated persons cannot consent. The defendant was prejudiced because trial counsel relied upon a clearly signaled instruction that the trial court never gave and, as a result, conceded the central issue — intoxication — in his closing argument. The case is significant because it once and for all clarifies the issue of intoxication and consent in rape cases, and suggests that the trial court is required to instruct juries in cases where the defense of consent is raised that if they find that the complaining witness was intoxicated, they must also decide whether the complaining witness' level of intoxication was such that he or she was wholly insensible and/or incapable of consenting.

Result: Appeals Court reversed the conviction.

Client Acquitted on Federal Charges of Money Laundering Scheme

A federal jury in Miami, Florida, found our firm's client not guilty on a money laundering scheme charge. Attorney Pellegrino contended that the client was a victim of a sting by a federal task force, and that he had no intention of breaking the law. He was accused of attempting to sell a $700,000 Ferrari to an undercover agent in an alleged money-laundering scheme. The prosecution wanted our client to plea bargain to a lesser offense and testify against others, but our client would not plead to something he did not do. Instead, attorney Pellegrino tried the case, asserting a defense that his client had been entrapped by the government agents. The federal prosecutor in this case was the person who successfully prosecuted Manuel Noriega, Panama's former military leader.

Result: The jury returned found our client not guilty.