Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5

    Default Malicious Destruction of Property Over 250

    My question involves criminal law for the state of: Massachusetts

    A friend received a court summons and was not arrested for two criminal charges. He was arraigned for malicious destruction of property over 250 and larceny under 250. He was given a court appointed attorney who set a trial date.

    A few years ago he pleaded guilty to larceny under 250. The case was continued without a finding.

    1. He was not arrested. Is that because there was not enough evidence to arrest, or is that the way it is done? Was he indited by a grand jury? Is not being arrested a good sign of not being able to be convicted, or does it not matter?

    2. Is his criminal record allowed to be admitted in court?

    The evidence consists of the "victim's" statement to police, pictures of two broken mugs, other pictures of the crime scene not too specific.
    Allegedly, a pair of glasses were scratched and cash was taken. No one else was considered a suspect except my friend.

    3. Is that enough evidence to convict? what tactics would be used to prove his guilt, what can he do to defend?

    4. what are his chances of being convicted? should he get a lawyer? or just stick with a court appointed? or represent himself?

    5. to me, it seem like he was overcharged. does that sound like malicious destruction of property to any one else, or was this an overreaction?

    6. there is no proof that the cash ever existed. Is it normal for a person to be charged criminally for a claim when there is no proof that it even happen?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toledo, OH
    Posts
    16,307

    Default Re: Malicious Destruction of Property Over 250

    1. Doesn't matter. And he wasn't cuffed and stuffed because the officer didn't feel a need to do so.

    2. Possibly, to show a pattern of poor behavior.

    3. We can't answer that. Crystal ball doesn't seem to be interested in revealing the other pertinent details.

    4. Of course he should get a lawyer. It's foolish to go to court without one. If he can't afford private counsel, he should go with the PD.

    5. Was he a butterfingers and accidentally dropped some stuff? Not malicious. Broke the stuff on purpose or while fighting? Malicious.

    6. "Proof" is for court.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Vandalism and Mischief: Malicious Destruction of Property Charges Involving a Vehicle
    By aarussll87 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-29-2011, 12:08 PM
  2. Vandalism and Mischief: Malicious Destruction of Property
    By hutch2005 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-21-2009, 08:55 AM
  3. F Visas: Malicious Destruction of Property Charges for an F1 Student
    By avigail in forum Visas for Business, Tourism and Family
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-10-2008, 08:21 AM
  4. Vandalism and Mischief: Malicious Destruction Under $500
    By bill1973 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-28-2007, 12:54 PM
  5. Vandalism and Mischief: Malicious Destruction of Property in Michigan
    By concerned26 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-18-2007, 07:17 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources