Rhode Island White Collar Crime's Defense Attorney John E. MacDonald named Local Counsel in $10 Million bribery case

Rhode Island White Collar Defense Attorney John E. MacDonald named as the Local Counsel representing Rhode Island Defense Contractor and U.S. Navy personnel in a $10 Million bribery case. Details found below were reported in last weeks Providence Journal. 

R.I. Defense Firm Owner Out On Bond After Court Appearance

10:18 AM EST on Wednesday, February 16, 2011
By Katie Mulvaney, John E. Mulligan, and Tom Mooney


PROVIDENCE — Anjan Dutta-Gupta drove with his family by van from Georgia to face federal charges in Rhode Island that he doled out $10 million in bribes to secure Navy contracts for his Middletown company.

In his first appearance in U.S. District Court, in Rhode Island, Dutta-Gupta bowed his head slightly as he told U.S. Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond Tuesday he understood the charge against him.

“I do, sir,” said Dutta-Gupta as his wife, two children and other family members looked on. The 58-year-old founder of Georgia-based Advanced Solutions for Tomorrow Inc. used headphones to assist his hearing. Heavyset with salt-and-pepper hair and a pronounced accent, Dutta-Gupta leaned in to speak with his lawyers John E. MacDonald and David M. Fragale, a Washington, D.C., attorney specializing in white-collar criminal defense.
Extra

Authorities arrested Dutta-Gupta on Feb. 6 in Atlanta as he returned from Chile. He is charged with bribing Ralph M. Mariano, a civilian program manager with the Naval Sea Systems Command, in a $10-million kickback scheme that authorities allege siphoned thousands of federal dollars to Dutta-Gupta, Mariano and Mariano’s family through a series of shell companies. Mariano, of Arlington, Va., who managed Advanced Solutions’ contracts with the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, in Newport, was also charged with bribery.

A federal magistrate in Georgia released Dutta-Gupta last week on a $25,000 unsecured bond. But Almond upped that sum Tuesday to a $50,000 unsecured bond, plus he must post $10,000 within a week.

Almond imposed the $10,000 bond, he said, in lieu of requiring Dutta-Gupta, of Roswell, Ga., to be monitored electronically and abide by a curfew, as Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Reich had asked. Almond restricted Dutta-Gupta’s travel to northern Georgia; Washington, D.C.; and Rhode Island. A native of Calcutta who is a naturalized U.S. citizen, Dutta-Gupta surrendered his passport.

Dutta-Gupta asked Almond if he would be violating the terms of his release by driving from Georgia to his Rhode Island court dates. Almond said he could stop briefly for food and gas but should not make long-term stops on his journeys without consulting court officials.

Dutta-Gupta founded Advanced Solutions in 1992, overseeing its growth as its Navy business increased. The firm worked on Navy research programs in Newport that included unmanned underwater vehicles and submarine command and control systems. The company is headquartered in Roswell, Ga., with offices in Middletown and Fairfax, Va.

Authorities say Dutta-Gupta and Mariano engineered a system of regular payments, largely for work never performed, to shell companies in a scheme dating to the late 1990s. A criminal complaint describes Mariano using his power as a senior Navy program official to steer contracts to Advanced Solutions.

Dutta-Gupta is accused of then channeling about $10 million, through companies he and associates controlled, to Mariano, his relatives and friends in return for his role in securing millions of dollars in Navy contracts for Dutta-Gupta’s firm.

Advanced Solutions was something of a family affair, according to the complaint, statements on the company’s website and other sources; Anjan’s wife, Indrani, was a company vice president.

The Dutta-Guptas and their children have been financial supporters of political campaigns. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based campaign finance monitor, the four family members have given an aggregate total of $48,512 to political campaigns over the years. But Anjan and Indrani Dutta-Gupta concentrated their political giving on members of the Rhode Island congressional delegation.

The younger Dutta-Guptas grew up in Georgia, where they ranked as award-winning scholars. Daughter Amrita Dutta-Gupta graduated from Vanderbilt University in 2003 and is listed as a fellow at the university’s management school.

A 2005 graduate of the University of Chicago, son Indivar Dutta-Gupta served as an $89,000-a-year staffer on the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee until last year. He joined the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington think tank, this year. He is an expert on poverty issues.

Amrita, too, was president of Paramount Solutions, another defense contractor with offices in Middletown that did business with the Navy and Advanced Solutions. Like her father’s company, Paramount Solutions secured Navy work “earmarked” into a federal spending bill by Sen. Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island.

Reed’s office said Tuesday that the senator secured a $1.6-million project that Paramount Solutions undertook jointly with the Naval Undersea Systems Command in Newport. That earmark, for work on submarine command-and-control systems, was in the 2008 appropriations bill. Amrita Dutta-Gupta was chief financial officer of the firm at the time, according to a company statement in which she thanked the senator for his assistance.

Reed spokesman Chip Unruh said the senator does not recall having met Amrita Dutta-Gupta.

Paramount Solutions was registered in Rhode Island in 2005 as a Georgia-based company “pursuing professional development services opportunities” with the state and the Navy. Amrita Dutta-Gupta was listed as president and vice president at the time. The directors include Wayne King of Bristol, who was in the news Monday as the acting chief of Advanced Solutions who informed its nearly 100 employees in Middletown that the company was closing its doors.

Paramount is tucked into a corner of a small, one-story office plaza along Aquidneck Avenue, less than two miles from Advanced Solutions for Tomorrow.

In total, Reed and former Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy secured more than $13 million in federal earmark money for Advanced Solutions projects. But Reed’s spokesman and a former top aide to Kennedy have said emphatically there appear to be no links between the money the lawmakers earmarked for the firm and the contracts detailed in the criminal papers as corrupted by Mariano and Dutta-Gupta.

There has been no suggestion of impropriety by Amrita Dutta-Gupta’s company or by the members of the state’s political delegation. It is not clear whether Amrita Dutta-Gupta is still associated with the firm.

A few former Advanced Solutions employees turned up Tuesday to witness Dutta-Gupta’s court appearance.

One, Richard Kulesh, stood in the cold outside the federal building waiting to face his old boss and watch him walk in.

“I want to see him go in … and I want the truth to come out,” said Kulesh, 37, of North Kingstown. “And if he’s done wrong, I want to see him to get his due.”

Kulesh described Dutta-Gupta as the kind of boss who made an effort to know the names of all, but “I had a lot of anger,” he said. His feelings moved to skepticism when he heard one of Dutta-Gupta’s lawyers say that the defendant, alleged to have skimmed more than $10 million from federal government contracts, had only $20,000 in cash.

“That’s really hard to believe,” he said. “I’m genuinely shocked by that. You could speculate all day about why.”

Dutta-Gupta “was a great guy if you can overlook this.”

Kulesh scoffed at his own suggestion.

He couldn’t.

KEY POINTS: Advanced Solutions for Tomorrow

STATUS: The company closed Monday; CEO Wayne M. King told employees in an e-mail that its assets had been frozen and efforts to find a buyer had failed. The closing followed the Feb. 6 arrest of company founder and owner Anjan Dutta-Gupta.

LOCATION: Had headquarters in Roswell, Ga., with offices in Washington and in Middletown, at the Aquidneck Corporate Park.

EMPLOYEES: Work force, about 160, has been laid off.

REVENUES: $30 million

BUSINESS: Provided information and technology services to government and private industry, including the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, in Newport. It had won contracts to develop submarine technology and underwater, unmanned vehicles for reconnaissance and combat missions. ASFT had 10 open contracts with the Navy, including the 3 largest, which total $128 million.

HISTORY: Founded by Anjan Dutta-Gupta in 1992 through a Department of Defense mentor program. The company expanded into Rhode Island in 1996 when it acquired Amtech, of Newport.

Sources: Affidavit of Patrick J. Hegart, special agent of U.S. Department of Defense, Criminal Investigative Service; ASFT Web pages, Zoominfo.com.

KEY PLAYER: Anjan Dutta-Gupta

AGE: 58

HOME: Roswell, Ga.

GROWING UP: Raised in Calcutta, India, son of a prominent banker from a large family.

EDUCATION: Undergraduate degree, University of Calcutta; master’s degree in business management from the Institute of Business Management, in Pakistan.

FAMILY: Married to Indrani Dutta-Gupta, former executive vice president of Advanced Solutions for Tomorrow; two children.

Sources: Affidavit of Patrick J. Hegart, special agent of U.S. Department of Defense, Criminal Investigative Service; article published by Indian-American author Kavitta Chibber

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Post-Conviction Relief Attorney MacDonald vacates a Misdemeanor conviction for Domestic Assault

Criminal Defense Attorney Results

Post-Conviction Relief Attorney John E. MacDonald announces a successful result for a client facing deportation. Attorney MacDonald achieved post-conviction relief for client and vacates a Misdemeanor conviction for Domestic Assault. 

CASE DETAILS: Client had a 2003 misdemeanor conviction for domestic assault. Client is a lawful permanent resident from Portugal who would have been subject to deportation if the conviction remained in place.

OUTCOME: The grounds of the motion was failure to receive the proper alien warnings. Upon appeal misdemeanor conviction vacated in Kent County Superior Court.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Post Conviction Relief Attorney in RI

A criminal conviction can have serious repercussions for you if you are here in the United States as an immigrant. 

In many cases, criminal charges can bring the possibility of deportation and removal proceedings if you are found guilty.

The post-conviction relief process may be the only recourse available to you under certain circumstances.

A conviction can keep you from obtaining immigration benefits, and can contribute to the risk of your deportation.

John E. MacDonald, a RI Immigration attorney is an expert at post-conviction relief cases. Attorney MacDonald has successfully defended clients in countless situations where the precedent of Padilla v. Kentucky has been applied.

Attorney MacDonald has devoted a substantial amount of his time to learning everything he can about this landmark case and how it may be applied to vacating criminal convictions, and preserving Immigration status.

Under post-conviction relief statutes in RI 10-9.1-1(a), your conviction must be in violation of either your US Constitutional rights, or the RI Constitution or the laws of this state. It will be up to you and your attorney to prove to the court that you have a valid claim for post-conviction relief, and that your prior conviction should be vacated. You will need to prove this to the court by a preponderance of the evidence and the Attorney General will have the opportunity to challenge the petition presented.

One very important argument that can be presented to the court is that at the time you made your plea agreement, you were not informed that the conviction would have consequences upon your Immigration status.

Another argument can be made in instances where you did not understand the plea agreement you were entering into and what it would entail.

Even if the Court decides to vacate your conviction however, you will still need to defend yourself against the original charges. Navigating the criminal justice system can be nearly impossible on your own.

As an experienced RI post-conviction relief attorney, John E. MacDonald will provide you with the best possible representation for your petition, and legal defense for any charges remaining after the conviction is vacated. Contact the office now at (401) 421-1440 for a free consultation or more information.

To learn more about John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Robbery Case Results

Criminal Case Results from John MacDonald

May, 2012:

Client found NOT GUILTY of ASSAULT WITH INTENT TO ROB.

This charge is Rhode Island’s equivalent of attempted robbery.

In a jury waived trial, client admitted his guilt in assaulting another individual but adamantly denied he ever attempted to rob.

After trial, client was acquitted of the felony attempted robbery charge and instead found responsible for the lesser included assault charge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Child Molestation in RI

Rhode Island Child Molestation

It is a most unfortunate reality that there are an average of 150-300 cases of child-molestation reported in the state of Rhode Island each year. Child Molestation falls under the category of Child Abuse, which is defined as endangering the physical or mental health of a child via excessive, or harmful punishment, sexual exploitation, neglect, or abandonment.

If you or anyone you know have information regarding the possible abuse of a child in the state of Rhode Island, you are legally required to immediately contact The Department for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) at (401) 528-3502.

Accusations and Convictions

Due to the seriousness of child abuse crimes, penalties in most states are severe, and even being implicated or accused of child molestation is enough to drastically change your life forever, even if you are completely innocent. A child abuse or child molestation charge on your record will undoubtedly affect your chances of gaining employment, especially if you intend to work around children, or as a public official.

What constitutes Child Molestation?

Child molestation has many forms, most typically of which include direct sexual contact such as touching, rubbing, or groping in a lewd or lascivious manner. However there are many more forms of child molestation that often accompany the most common forms of abuse. Some of these forms of sexual child abuse include:

・ Indecent verbal contact

・ Indecent written contact such as texts, emails, or letters

・ Video taping a child in a lewd or lascivious manner

・ Photographing a child in a lewd or lascivious manner

・ Using a child for financial gain via prostitution

Penalties for Child Molestation

The state of Rhode Island does not treat the crime of child abuse or child molestation lightly, and has mandated severe punishments for those convicted of the crime. First degree child molestation convictions carry a minimum of 6 years in prison, and a maximum of 30 years. Second degree child molestation convictions carry a minimum of 25 years in prison, and a maximum of life. Indecent soliciting of a child will result in a minimum of 5 years imprisonment.

Have you or your loved ones been accused of Child Molestation?

Because of the dangers involved with being accused of child molestation, you can not afford to waste precious time that can be used to build your defense. There are many individuals that are falsely accused every year, and are in some cases; wrongly convicted. Regardless of whether or not you are guilty, everyone deserves a legal defense.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Criminal Defense Attorney and Criminal Defendant Rights

The role of Padilla v. Kentucky continues to be a pertinent decision making tool in any discussion about the rights of criminal defendants within our criminal justice system. The following article speaks to the repercussions of this landmark decision.

Padilla v. Kentucky and the Role of Criminal Defense Representation

May 3, 2011

Since the U.S. Supreme court decided Padilla v. Kentucky in early 2010, the role of criminal defense representation related to counseling clients about the broader consequences of criminal convictions has been under scrutiny.

Since the U.S. Supreme court decided Padilla v. Kentucky in early 2010, the role of criminal defense representation related to counseling clients about the broader consequences of criminal convictions has been under scrutiny. The American Bar Association (ABA) used Padilla as a starting point to form a task force in late 2010 to study the impact of the case.

While the outcome of the study could directly affect how current and past criminal cases are handled, the main practice consideration for criminal defense attorneys, particularly in New York, is to understand and explain conviction consequences more fully to their clients.

Padilla v. Kentucky

In Padilla, the Court found that a criminal defense attorney exhibited "constitutionally deficient" representation when he did not counsel a non-citizen client about the deportation consequences of a guilty plea.

Jose Padilla resided in the United States as a legal permanent resident for more than 40 years. He was even a recognized Vietnam War veteran. Padilla was charged with transporting marijuana in Kentucky, which put himself at risk for deportation because he was not a citizen. Padilla's lawyer advised him to enter a guilty plea under the assumption that his many years living in the U.S. would offset his immigrant status. Immediately following his guilty plea, Padilla was ordered to be deported.

Padilla claimed during his post-conviction hearing, which is where a defendant asks to have a conviction overturned, that his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was violated because of his attorney's advice was incorrect.

Although the Kentucky Court of Appeals sided with Padilla, the Kentucky Supreme Court denied Padilla's request to set aside his guilty plea. They stated that the Sixth Amendment "does not protect defendants from erroneous deportation advice because deportation is merely a 'collateral' consequence of a conviction." The U.S. Supreme Court, however, decided in favor of Padilla. The Court held that criminal defense attorneys must advise their clients when a criminal plea bears a risk of deportation, because of the seriousness of this consequence due to pleading guilty to a criminal charge.

Padilla's conviction was therefore overturned because his lawyer did not inform him about the likelihood of deportation after pleading guilty. This advice was deemed ineffective, which did infringe on Padilla's Sixth Amendment rights.

Since the opinion was published in March of 2010, the case has been cited in other criminal convictions where guilty pleas, even by U.S. citizens, resulted in negative consequences like termination of employment, loss of child custody, removal from housing and as evidence in civil lawsuits. This shows that while the Padilla ruling specifically addresses lawyers representing immigrant clients in criminal proceedings, the case has had a wider impact on criminal defense representation and expectations as a whole.

ABA Task Force

In December of 2010, the ABA's criminal justice section formed a task force to study the impact of Padilla v. Kentucky and related rulings on the practice of criminal defense. The task force will not only focus on the client advising obligations the Padilla case places on criminal defense attorneys, but it will also address how lawyers can achieve the broader role and responsibilities now expected of them.

The ABA criminal section chair, and member of the task force, is law school professor Bruce Green, who stated in an interview with the New York Law Journal that "Padilla raised the level of consciousness. It has reminded lawyers that they must learn about, and advise clients about, the impact of a guilty plea on their immigration status and in other significant ways beyond sentencing."

Green also indicated that the group has gathered significant data on criminal cases that resulted in specific consequences directly related to a plea or conviction.

The task force will continue to analyze what further assistance lawyers can give to advise clients about any possible consequences, but in the meantime Green thinks that "Criminal defense lawyers might help by broadening the scope of their representation beyond the criminal case or by making referrals to, and collaborating with, other professionals. The task force will study how lawyers and their offices address these situations, often in the face of time and resource limitations."

Practice Considerations

Specifically in New York, the Padilla v. Kentucky decision has increased the number of requests to overturn convictions and apply Padilla retroactively because of insufficient legal advice about entering guilty pleas and immigration consequences. It has also caused both prosecutors and defense attorneys to offer up and seek out more options and information about what a particular conviction may do to a non-citizen living and working in the U.S.

While Padilla has had a direct impact on practicing criminal defense in New York, it is unknown whether the results of the task force will be as profound. The main outcome may be that defense lawyers should advise clients about any legal or non-legal consequences, such as termination of public housing, when entering a guilty plea, which is a notion that has not yet been applied in a New York court.

For criminal defense attorneys, the most important lesson both Padilla and the ABA task force teaches is that defense lawyers need to understand their clients' situations and be willing to fully explain the consequences of any pleas or convictions before they are entered. If you were recently charged with a crime and are either a U.S. citizen or non-citizen in New York, contact an experienced New York criminal defense attorney with immigration knowledge to advise you about all possible consequences and handle your case properly from the start.

Article provided by Mark J. Sacco

Visit us at www.mjsacco.com
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Legal Advice on the Internet

It is no secret that the Internet has become our own personal virtual library. What may escape some business owners this year however, is the magnitude of the importance in maintaining not only your Internet business presence, but also keeping your professional education and services up to date with the changing needs of the people you serve with your law practice.

You may consider yourself highly skilled in your field, however, if you are outmoded or falling behind in the technology available to reach you, no one else will ever know of your skills. People have to find you online first.

Enter the legal forum system. This new breed of advice column features a question and answer forum style, allowing clients to log-in anonymously, and get their questions answered by an actual attorney. Most forums are free to ask your question, some charge for the answers, and still others allow a voting system to decide the best answer, and who will get the minimal payment offered.

If you'd like to jump ahead of the crowd a bit, set up a system to offer quick advice on your own website instead.

'E-lawyering will be mainstream in 3 years'

By KATHRYN LEGER
March 4, 2011


A few weeks ago, a New Brunswick judge ordered a lawyer to force his client to download her Facebook page so that it could be used against her in a personal injury lawsuit with an insurer.

The lawyer, James Crocco, was told by the judge, Frederick P. Ferguson of Court of Queen's Bench, that he should hire another lawyer to summon his client to a meeting without telling her what it was about and obtain the download lest she delete some of her photos and videos.

The case has since been settled out of court with a cash award for the woman claiming a settlement from the insurer of the other driver involved in the car accident that injured her.

That stumped plans by her lawyer to challenge the order in appeals court on the grounds that it was the equivalent of executing a civil search warrant on his client and that it threatened her right to legal advice.

It is unclear whether such an order could be issued in Quebec, but the case - similar in nature to one in Quebec last year that captured worldwide attention - underlines how social media and new technology are changing the ways lawyers can advance or defend their clients' claims in court.

What jurisprudence does exist in Quebec relative to the use of social media as evidence in courts and what legal tools are available to different parties to obtain such evidence will be discussed at the fifth edition of the Legal IT conference that takes place a few weeks from now in Montreal (see www.legalit. ca for details).

"People think the rules are different because it is in a computer format, but there are still reliability thresholds to be achieved," says Marcel Naud, the Robic LLP intellectual property lawyer who is director of the organizing committee for the conference sponsored by the Young Bar Association of Montreal following its founding by Dominic Jaar, now legal technology adviser with KPMG Canada in Montreal.

"You have to be comfortable with issues that develop online because if you say: 'I don't deal with online stuff because it is too complicated,' you might miss something that is quite material."

Xavier Beauchamp-Tremblay, an intellectual property lawyer at Ogilvy Renault LLP who lined up this year's speakers for LegalIT 5.0, added: "Since the financial crisis, it is has been more and more important for lawyers to understand technology to become more productive and give better client service and understand the issues.

"We're trying to provide that on the practical side to try and get lawyers to embrace technology but be aware of their potential pitfalls.

"And on the theoretical side, to understand how technology is very rapidly changing the role of law in many domains."

"If you don't stay informed, you cease to be relevant," said Robic's Naud, adding that the conference also features forward-looking issues that could be in the mainstream in a year or two from now.

The dispensing of legal services to the public over the Internet is one of them.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/lawyering+will+mainstream+years/4381858/story.html#ixzz1FdwfR9Z3
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Immigration Attorney John E. MacDonald Featured Speaker for RI Bar Association Continuing Legal Education Events

John MacDonald Speaking at RIBA

On March 10 and March 16, 2011, Attorney John MacDonald will provide two Food for Thought seminars entitled The Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions, in conjunction with the RI Bar Association's CLE program in coordination with the president of the Newport County Bar Association. The seminars will be available in Providence on the 10th, and in Middletown RI on the 16th, and will run from approximately 12:45PM to 1:45PM.

This session focuses on the possible consequences of criminal convictions upon non-citizens, and your duty to advise your client in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Padilla v. Kentucky.

The immigration consequences of a criminal conviction may be far greater than any punishment of jail time, probation or a fine. This program will help you evaluate whether criminal conviction, diversion, or a plea will have an adverse affect on your client's immigration status and offer practical strategies for advising your client.

Attorney MacDonald stated, “My experience in Padilla v. Kentucky has given me an in depth understanding of the immigration implications involved in criminal matters. I am looking forward to speaking on this important topic again.”

The case of Padilla v. Kentucky is a precedent setting Supreme Court case involving the rights of a criminal defendant to be informed regarding the possibility of deportation when entering into plea agreements, or being found guilty of all but the most minor criminal offenses. With the recent changes to the Immigration laws, private counsel is now in the position of having to inform criminal clients about the possibility of deportation in all but the most obscurely referenced Immigration laws.

In all criminal cases involving immigrants, counsel must at least inform the client that the chance of deportation exists.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

RI Defense Attorney Posts Article Regarding Double Attempted Murder in Tiverton RI

RI Criminal Defense Attorney MacDonald posts the following article concerning a Tiverton man who was charged with murdering his father and attempting to murder his mother. The full article follows below.

RI man charged in stabbing death of father

September 5, 2010

TIVERTON, R.I.—Police say a man fatally stabbed his father and tried to stab his mother to death at their home.

Tiverton police say Joel Beaulieu (Bull-'Yuh) is charged with murder in the death of his 62-year-old father, Conrad Beaulieu, and assault with intent to murder his mother, Diane Beaulieu, early Sunday morning. The couple were teachers in Tiverton.

The 29-year-old Joel Beaulieu was injured. He was treated and released from Rhode Island Hospital.

Police say the 58 year-old Diane Beaulieu remains at Rhode Island Hospital, which said it has no information on her condition.

Police say they responded to 911 calls from neighbors who reported screams. A motive has not been determined.

The 29-year-old Joel Beaulieu is to be arraigned Tuesday at Newport District Court.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Medical Marijuana Laws in Rhode Island

The medical marijuana laws in RI have been in effect since 2006, however, are receiving a lot of publicity of late due to individuals who are not aware of the policies that govern the growing of medical marijuana.

The people who grow and distribute medical marijuana for the state run what is called, Compassion Centers. The guidelines for obtaining licensing for these centers is very strict and many are turned away for either lack of adequate criteria, or failure to fill out the forms correctly.

There has been some ambiguity with regard to what is required, and officials for the state have promised to better explain the necessary format and guidelines to applicants.

Recently, over 15 people were denied status as a Compassion Center for everything ranging from failure to meet scoring requirements, to going over the page limit for the application. The Department of Health (HEALTH) in RI has undergone an extensive review of the application and has clarified the original issues.

According to the language of the law passed in 2006, the State of RI was obligated, within 90 days of the effective date of the act, to begin accepting applications for the operation of a single compassion center. Further, the act called for the first compassion center in the state to be approved by December 2009.

To date there are none.

Under the Medical Marijuana growing laws for the state, an owner can be charged with a drug related offense and sent to jail for just one plant over the limit.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Road Rage Axe Attack Suspect Still at Large in RI

RI Criminal Defense Attorney MacDonald found this article concerning a road rage incident in RI that left a Warwick man injured when an unknown assailant attacked the victim with an axe.

Fortunately, the attack only caused minor injuries to the victim's head and thigh. The suspect involved in the attack however, has not been apprehended. The full article follows below.

Warwick police blame road rage in ax attack on driver

Aug 31, 2010
Bryan Rourke

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- A Warwick man was attacked Tuesday afternoon by another motorist with an ax, in what may have been a road rage incident, the Warwick Police Department reported.

Joseph Gallagher, of 20 Sheppard Drive, suffered injuries to the back of his head and his thigh, the police reported.

"It is not a life-threatening situation," said Chief Col. Stephen M. McCartney of the Warwick police. "But when someone is attacked with an ax, that is pretty upsetting."

Police and a rescue vehicle responded to Gallagher at his house on Sheppard Drive at about 3 p.m., but the police said the attack occurred somewhere else and Gallagher drove home. McCartney said the victim was conscious when the police arrived and said that he was attacked by two men.

The assault, said Lt. Gregory Coutu, may have been the result of road rage.

The police are now looking for the two alleged ssailants, who reportedly drove away in a red 2000 Hyundai Elantra with a Rhode Island license plate of HJ 396.

Gallagher was brought by rescue to Rhode Island Hospital. At 6:40 p.m., the hospital reported he was being treated in the emergency room.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

Stolen Goods Charge Dismissed After Alien Warnings Neglected

RI Criminal Defense Attorney MacDonald reports recent case results for client charged with receiving stolen goods, and an Immigration matter in RI.

Post conviction relief was granted in a 2006 matter involving the charge of receiving stolen goods.

The client has represented himself pro se and was not properly advised about his alien warnings.

Both the plea and sentence were vacated. The charge was immediately dismissed.

Client is now eligible to file to re-open his prior Immigration Court order of removal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

65 Year Old Medical Marijuana Grower in Scituate Arrested

RI Possession of Marijuana Defense Attorney MacDonald of Aggressive Legal Services posts the article below regarding state laws that prohibit State Police from obtaining information concerning marijuana growers status as a patient legally permitted to grow medical use marijuana on his property, prior to show of force during arrest.

Licensed grower, 65, arrested on marijuana charges

Aug 20, 2010
W. Zachary Malinowski


SCITUATE -- The state police used aerial surveillance and employed its SWAT team on Thursday to corral a 65-year-old man who they believed was a major drug dealer. Instead, they learned after the fact that the suspect was licensed through the Rhode Island Health Department to grow marijuana to cope with his medical problems.

Still, Louis Magiera, of 89 Nipmuc Trail, Scituate, was charged with two felony marijuana counts for growing eight more marijuana plants than he is allowed to grow in the state program. Under the rules of the program, a patient is allowed to grow up to 12 marijuana plants for his own use. The state police said they discovered 20 plants on his sprawling property.

State Police Capt. David Neill said the show of force could have been avoided had state law allowed the police to get information from the Health Department on whether Magiera was a patient or caregiver in the medical marijuana program.

"If we knew he was a patient and had a right to grow, we would have handled it differently," he said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

RI Defendant in Shooting Crime Over a Cigarette Sentenced to 10 Years

A 25 year old RI man, Marques Wilson, was sentenced this week by Judge Charles H. Pelton for shooting a RI man in the chest over a cigarette. 

The victim is a 41 year old man who was sitting in his vehicle having a cigarette in the parking lot of the Genesis Medical Center in Davenport while waiting for his son, who was being treated in the hospital for an injury.

Wilson walked up to the victim and asked him for a cigarette. When the victim replied that he did not have another to share, Wilson tried to forcibly remove him from the vehicle, ultimately pulling out a gun and shooting him in the chest before fleeing the scene in a group of three vehicles that were later apprehended in Moline after a police chase.

The victims injuries, a gunshot wound to the mid-torso, were serious enough that he spent 6 days in the hospital and has not yet returned to work.

Wilson maintained that it was not proven that he was the actual shooter in the crime although the evidence proved differently, however the victim himself could not identify Wilson as the person who attacked him. The accused's mother also spoke out after the hearing stating that there was another person involved and that her son was innocent of the charges against him.

The second suspect, Johnny D. Angel IV, also of Rock Island, is scheduled for trial on the charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm on August 30, 2010 in the Rock Island County Circuit Court.

In the course of his trial, Wilson insisted that his other convictions for violent behavior not be taken into account for the charge involved in the shooting. Two weeks after the hospital shooting however, he stomped, kicked and punched a Liberian refugee, and along with another juvenile, stole a bike from the man. He was sentenced 24 months conditional discharge for pleading guilty to theft regarding the incident.

Judge Pelton and the jury had the option to sentence Wilson to up to 20 years in prison for the shooting crime. The fact that he only received 10 years was a testament to the fact that the Judge and jury in the matter felt he was young enough to change.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

New Probation Violation Reform Laws Now in Effect in RI

June 12, 2010 marked the day when new probation violation laws went into effect here in Rhode Island. 

The bill, sponsored by Senators Perry, Levesque C, Miller, Metts and Sosnowski, and Representative David Segal, makes it illegal to keep someone in prison for violating probation for a crime that they were never proven of committing.

The law was changed because, in addition to two other states in the US, RI had the worst probation violation law in existence. The previous law stated that a person who was charged with any crime, whether proven guilty or not, would be in violation of their probation for any past crimes for which they had already been convicted and sentenced. This law, in effect, had the capability to send people back to prison on the violation of their probation to serve out any suspended sentence, whether they were guilty of the allegations of the second charged crime or not.

The lunacy of this law played out in courtrooms where individuals would plead to lesser offenses, whether they were guilty or not. The reason behind this being that the defense of innocence to the crime that caused the violation in the first place, was not something that would keep them from having to return to prison for the violation itself.

The new law requires that any violations that are based upon a new charge for which the defendant has not been adjudged guilty (or acquitted or dismissed) within a reasonable amount of time, must be dismissed.

This is a tremendous leap in the criminal justice system for this State. In the past, RI had the unenviable position of being the worst state in the country regarding probation violation laws. Defendants were adjudged at the lowest standard of proof, and hearings were held at a time when mounting an adequate defense was all but impossible.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.

URI Rape Case Defendant Testifies He Had Consentual Sex

Sexual assault in RI is characterized by the act of engaging in any sexual penetration using coercion or force, or if the victim is determined to be mentally disabled, physically helpless, or mentally incapacitated and the accused is aware of that fact. There are varying degrees of this charge, however they all carry with them a serious felony conviction if you are found guilty as a defendant.

The following article from the Providence Journal regarding a URI student who has claimed she was raped by another student is pertinent as a sexual assault matter.

Defendant in Sexual Assault Case Testifies that Woman Agreed to Sex

01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, July 28, 2010

By Michael P. McKinney

Journal Staff Writer

SOUTH KINGSTOWN — Yaw Peprah, one of two University of Rhode Island students on trial for alleged sexual assaults of a woman in a dorm, testified Tuesday that he asked twice that night if she wanted to have sex and that she indicated she did.

The testimony contradicted that of the woman who accuses Peprah and Estifanos Gizaw of separate sexual assaults between midnight and 2 a.m. on Sept. 14, 2008.

Peprah said that the night of Sept. 13 he met her at the party in the Wiley Hall dormitory and they engaged in small talk. And they talked about a difficult math class he was taking, said Peprah, of Lincoln, an engineering student at URI.

The woman, he said, brought marijuana to the dorm suite and she and a few others, including Peprah, went outside the dormitory to smoke a joint she had rolled. The woman said Peprah could take in some smoke by kissing her after she inhaled, Peprah testified, and he said he kissed her.

The group got calzones to take back to eat in the dorm suite. Under questioning by defense lawyer Roy Fowler, Peprah testified he and the woman “were kissing and touching” on an elevator to the third floor and in the dorm suite’s common room. Peprah testified he asked if she wanted to have sex, and she said that was OK.

Eventually, Peprah went into the bedroom with the woman and, he said, they sat on the bed, talking, kissing and touching. He said he asked again if she wanted to have sex and she indicated she did.

Fowler, Peprah’s lawyer, asked if another defense witness, Oluwadamilola Adewale, who goes by Henry, had said anything to Peprah that night and whether Peprah did anything as a result.

“It came to mind I should ask” the woman “a couple of times if it’s OK to have sex,” Peprah said. What Adewale told Peprah was not brought out before the jury.

Peprah said he and the woman took their clothes off, and she asked if he had a condom. He put on clothes and got a condom from Gizaw in the hallway and returned to the room, but the condom broke. The woman said a friend had given her a condom, Peprah testified, and he got it from her bag.

The woman said she was OK when, at one point, two other women knocked at the door and came in to see how she was doing, Peprah testified.

The Journal does not identify people who authorities say were victims of sexual assault.

mmckinne@projo.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Criminal Defense, Divorce, or Immigration Law in RI contact Rhode Island Criminal Defense Lawyer John E. MacDonald at 401-421-1440.

To learn more about The Law Office of John MacDonald, please visit his website at AggressiveLegalServices.com.