Representative Criminal Defense Matters
- Distribution of child pornography — Defended a young student who was charged with five counts of distribution of child pornography. The high school student forwarded a nude photo of a fellow student to his friends, and due to the ages of the participants, the student’s act constituted a felony. Despite the seriousness of the offenses, attorney Bardi was able to convince the prosecutor to give his client pretrial probation for only six months. Simultaneously, attorney Bardi was able to prevent his client from being expelled from his school and being placed on the sex offender registry.
- Domestic assault and battery — Defended an immigrant charged with domestic assault and battery. In order to prevent deportation for his client, attorney Bardi was able to convince the prosecutor to give his client pretrial probation conditioned on the fact that his client and his wife participate in counseling. In addition, attorney Bardi had his client enroll in an anger management program.
- Drug possession and possession to distribute — Defended a man who was charged with possession of a Class A substance (heroin) and possession to distribute a Class A substance (heroin). The Lawrence police conducted surveillance of the driver’s vehicle and arrested him and his passengers after observing an alleged drug deal. The police conducted a search of the vehicle and the persons therein, which led to the police finding heroin on one of the passengers and in the driver’s vehicle. However, in spite of the strong evidence against attorney Bardi’s client, who was the driver, attorney Bardi was able to get the possession to distribute charge dismissed and a continuance without a finding for one year on the possession charge.
- Assault and battery on a police officer and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon on a police officer — Wrentham District Court — Defended a man who attended a Patriots football game who was charged with assault and battery on a police officer and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon on a police officer. He was absolved of all other charges related to his alleged assaults on others. The felony charges were reduced to misdemeanors, and the defendant was given a continuance without a finding of guilty based upon an apology letter and his attendance in counseling for anger management.
- Assault — Concord District Court — Defended a college student against charges of assault upon his girlfriend. Case disposed of by way of pretrial probation without any finding of guilt. The case was later dismissed.
- Arson and insurance fraud — New York state — Attorney Bardi defended a husband and wife who were charged with insurance fraud and arson in connection with the explosion of their home from a gas leak. The insurer’s collection of evidence indicated that the husband had tampered with the gas pipes right before the explosion. Charges against the wife were dismissed and the husband was later found not guilty. Attorney Bardi’s defense was there was no financial motive of any sort for the husband and wife to deliberately cause an explosion destroying all of their property.
- Kidnapping — New Bedford Superior Court — Attorney Bardi defended an individual charged with kidnapping another person inside an ATM vestibule. The commonwealth decided to indict his client for this felony offense; however, attorney Bardi was successful in having the indictment dismissed, pointing out the fact that the chief investigating officer used misleading statements to the grand jury. The commonwealth re-indicted the client, but attorney Bardi was able to receive a sentence of pretrial probation, ultimately avoiding a guilty plea.
- Illegal possession of firearm — Somerville District Court — Attorney Bardi defended a former marine who did not have a license to carry a firearm or to be in possession of ammunition. The charges the former marine faced had a combined mandatory minimum sentence of seven years. Attorney Bardi was able to avoid the mandatory minimums and proposed an alternative sentence to the judge. Ultimately, the former marine’s charges were reduced and the former marine served approximately 20 weekends of confinement.
- College disciplinary hearings — Attorney Bardi has defended numerous students across several states in college disciplinary proceedings. The crimes in connection to the disciplinary proceedings have been rape, assault and battery, drug distribution, alteration of college transcripts and underage drinking. Attorney Bardi has been able to use his experience in criminal law and protect each student’s rights and avoid expulsion from college.
Cases Handled By The Lawyers At The Boston, Massachusetts, Law Firm Of Richard C. Bardi & Associates LLC
Not Guilty After Assault And Battery Trial
Attorney Bardi represented a bicyclist who allegedly assaulted and battered an operator of a motor vehicle. It was alleged that the operator of the vehicle passed the bicyclist, pulled over and exited the vehicle in order to confront the bicyclist, whereupon the bicyclist struck the driver. At trial, attorney Bardi argued that the bicyclist was defending himself and his wife, who was also riding her bicycle, from the vehicle operator, who while in a fit of road rage exited his vehicle and struck the bicyclist, causing the bicyclist to defend himself. The jury found the bicyclist not guilty of assault, battery and disorderly conduct.
Operating Under The Influence Of Alcohol
Attorney Bardi appealed a client’s fifth conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Attorney Bardi obtained the release of the client from incarceration pending the resolution of the appeal. Upon appeal, attorney Bardi argued in written brief and before the appeals court that the trial judge committed an error while conducting a jury view of the scene of the operation of the vehicle, and that the judge committed an error in finding the defendant guilty of a fifth operating under the influence offense. The Appeals Court agreed with attorney Bardi and reversed the conviction, and the client was freed from all court-ordered restrictions.
Selected Cases — OUI/DUI Defense
- Operating under the influence, second offense — Worcester Superior Court — negligent operation of a motor vehicle resulting in serious bodily injury and the death of a fetus. The charges as they related to the fetus were dismissed.
- Operating under the influence — West Roxbury District Court — Man charged with operating under the influence of drugs as a result of smoking crack cocaine. Case dismissed for failure to prove operation of the motor vehicle.
- Operating under the influence — Martha’s Vineyard — Successfully defended a doctor whose breath test results were .09. The charge was reduced to driving to endanger, and the doctor avoided having to report to the Board of Registration in Medicine.
- Operating under the influence, third offense — Haverhill District Court — Attorney Bardi defended a client who was charged with an operating under the influence-third with a breath test reading of .19/.20 and successfully reduced the charge to an operating under the influence-second, avoiding the mandatory minimum of 180 days in jail. The client had failed the breath test, and the observations of the police officer were detrimental; however, attorney Bardi’s motion to suppress the breath test, bringing light to the police officer’s failure to comply with procedure, convinced the District Attorney’s Office to reduce the client’s charge to a second offense and no time was served.
- Operating under the influence, third offense — Haverhill District Court — The defendant faced a third offense operating under the influence charge; it was her fifth offense overall. Case reduced to a second offense with credit for in-home confinement.
- Operating under the influence, second offense, and leaving the scene of property damage — Quincy District Court — The property damage was covered by insurance, resulting in a dismissal. The operating under the influence charge was reduced to leaving the scene of property damage and operating to endanger, first offense, without any jail time.
- Operating under the influence, leaving the scene after causing property damage and operating to endanger — Dedham District Court — Successfully defended a police officer despite evidence that the defendant/police officer, who was off-duty, had been observed operating his motor vehicle erratically, striking several cars along the roadway, driving across a lawn and crashing into the side of a garage. The defendant/police officer was found not guilty of all charges.
- Operating under the influence — Newton District Court — Woman found not guilty of operating under the influence when she was found to be knocked out after striking a tree in the middle of a snow storm. They had no evidence of erratic operation and, due to the inclement weather, she was found not guilty.
- Operating under the influence — Boston Municipal Court — Driver charged with operating under the influence of alcohol while driving along Storrow Drive. Police officer acknowledged on cross-examination that there was reasonable doubt as to whether the driver’s performance in the field sobriety tests was a reflection of simply being nervous as opposed to the effects of alcohol.
- Operating under the influence — Hingham District Court — Successfully defended an individual who was charged with operating under the influence while driving the wrong way on a one-way street. Defendant was found not guilty.
- Operating under the influence, second offense — Newton District Court — Defendant received a not guilty of a second offense after being pulled over on Thanksgiving eve. Attorney Bardi was able to point out the contradictory statements of the police officers’ stories, which resulted in an acquittal for the defendant.
- Operating under the influence — Concord District Court — Underage drinker found not guilty despite acknowledging he drank beer at a Red Sox game prior to his arrest.
- Fourth Offense OUI Reduced to Third Offense OUI — Brockton District Court — Represented Defendant in a 4th offense OUI charge. The Client had four previous convictions, not just three, however, the Commonwealth only pursued the current offense as a fourth charge. Since the passage of Melanie’s Law in 2005, the penalties for subsequent OUI convictions have severely increased, making subsequent convictions for OUI all the more serious. Trials for subsequent OUI charges are bifurcated, meaning the Defendant must first be convicted of the current underlying offense, and then in a second, separate trial, the Commonwealth must prove the previous convictions alleged were the same individual. In this case, the Commonwealth produced no evidence demonstrating that the Defendant resided at the address listed on the docket sheet for one of the previous convictions, casting into doubt whether the two Defendants were, in fact, the same person. Further, the Judge indicated, from the bench, that she had no doubt that this was the Defendant’s fifth offense based on the records before her, but that the Commonwealth did not produce sufficient evidence for her to make such a ruling. Furthermore, in Massachusetts, it is required that a defendant have been given the opportunity to have counsel during the proceedings for a previous conviction, in order for the Commonwealth to subsequently be permitted to introduce that conviction. There is a presumption, rebuttable by the defendant, that the defendant received all rights to which s/he was entitled, including the right to counsel. The docket sheet for the Client’s oldest conviction contained no information regarding whether he had waived, been assigned, or obtained counsel. Based on this information, the Judge determined that one of the Client’s previous three convictions was inadmissible. The Client’s charge was reduced from what should have been a fifth offense OUI to a third offense OUI, shaving years off of the Client’s sentence. Thus, Richard C. Bardi & Associates snatched victory from the jaws of defeat.