Defensa criminal y lesiones personales en Boston

Despite getting his client’s criminal case dismissed, DCF issued a Neglect finding against Attorney Lown’s client.  Cross examination of the DCF field worker at a subsequent hearing got the unfair and wrongful finding of Neglect overturned. Attorney Lown then convinced a judge to permanently seal the criminal case.

Expert consultation with a former head of the State Crime Lab was crucial. It enabled defense counsel to cast doubt on the prosecution’s alleged forensic evidence and expose the officers’ lack of knowledge of proper procedures, testing requirements and basic scientific principles. Ultimately the jury rejected the prosecution’s allegations.

A young man who was Black and had no prior record purchased a gun which he kept on him for safety. He never applied for a “license to carry.” Sometime later, a police officer followed him down Canton’s main commercial throughway, eventually pulling him over just as he arrived at his girlfriend’s job to pick her up from work. The officer later claimed that the reason for the stop was “following too close” to the car in front of him. The officer detained Attorney Lown’s client and recovered a gun from his jacket pocket.

Lown’s statistical expert analyzed every traffic stop completed by this officer in the previous 4 years. Relying on US census data as well as direct observation of motorists in three different parts of town, the statistician accounted for nearly every possible variation regarding the racial mix of drivers on that Canton street on any given day. He ran 10,000 simulations using different racial variations which accounted for Canton’s demographics, that of its surrounding towns, the towns’ relative population size, the likely number of drivers vs. non-drivers, and the likelihood regarding each town’s contribution to the driving population of Canton. (Looking only at census data, Canton’s population is 9.8% Black while 29.5% of the arresting officer’s stops were of Black drivers).

Ultimately, this data showed that the percentage of Black drivers whom this officer stopped far exceeded every possible, fair representation of Canton’s Black driving population on any given day. In other words: race played a factor. After Attorney Lown provided this devastating evidence the prosecutor’s office voluntarily dismissed the case.

In two separate cases involving different women, an abusive boyfriend stashed his gun in his girlfriend’s car just prior to getting stopped by the police. There was little evidence that either woman had ever handled much less owned a gun, yet the Suffolk County DA’s office charged both with helping the boyfriend to transport an illegal firearm. Both were mothers and the charges carried mandatory jail time and, as a potential consequence, forced removal from their children. Lown hired a “battered women’s expert” to explain why a person conditioned to abuse is more likely to succumb to pressure. The first case took three years and a mis-trial before the DA finally agreed to drop the case. The second case took two years of litigation, court dates and moral pressure but ultimately the DAs office agreed to drop the charges. Both women suffered greatly under the constant threat of prosecution.  “I want to thank the Suffolk County DA’s office and especially two of the prosecutors who worked on this for keeping an open mind and for ultimately deciding to do the right thing,” Lown said.

Four Boston police officers identified Attorney Lown’s client “Brian” as an armed robber based on surveillance video. One identifying officer claimed to have known Brian for 20 years.  At the time Brian was 42 years old, had no criminal convictions and worked at a Boston housing development’s community center with at-risk youth.  Because police officers observed Brian interacting with youth who the police alleged were gang members the police used these “documented associations” to label Brian as a gang member himself and entered him in their permanent “Gang Database.”   Attorney Lown and his investigators not only defended Brian in court, they accumulated enough evidence to prove who the real suspect was. Finally, by subpoenaing the surveillance videos and dressing Brian as the robbery suspect, Lown’s team was able to reenact the robbery, a digital recreation which revealed obvious physical differences between Brian and the robber. One year later, the DA’s office agreed to drop the case. 

Attorney Lown won a not guilty verdict - his sixth straight - after a trial before a judge on a DUI case in Framingham. Lown’s client was almost 70 years old and was in his own driveway and walking into his home when a police officer stopped him at his front door. The officer stated that someone had called to complain about his driving. The officer then had this elderly individual do a series of balancing exercises, held him to unfair expectations and arrested him for DUI. On cross examination, the officer was exposed for failing to verify the client’s medical conditions, including the fact that he was wearing a back brace, and for disregarding all of the evidence which showed that an arrest was unjustified. The complete acquittal meant that the client could get his license and his life back.

Attorney Lown argued his client’s case before the full Pardon Board whose members voted unanimously to grant the request. It was then sent to Governor Baker who gave it his approval and soon after it was ratified by the Governor’s Council. Attorney Lown’s client, now 60, was arrested when he was 21 for stealing a spare tire after the car he was riding in got a flat. He accepted responsibility, pled guilty and paid restitution. He went on to raise two children as a single dad, even selling his motorcycle at a young age to fund his daughter’s private school education, and he later went on to become an electrical engineer for a defense contractor. Yet the conviction from when he was a young man still haunted him. It resulted in the state refusing to renew his gun license after a restrictive law change in 2015, and it blocked him from getting security clearance so as to rise in his company, secure a higher position and better pay. A single youthful mistake should not have this type of impact. Over the past 25 years, Massachusetts governors have pardoned a total of just 5 people. Pressure had built recently to increase the exercise of this “extraordinary power” with the Mass Bar Association issuing a report decrying the Pardon Board’s backlog and delays in hearing petitions. Mass ranks at the bottom of the list of states to utilize this power to forgive. We need more pardons. At least for this client, life can start anew.

Attorney Lown recently prevailed at a restraining order hearing in Chelsea District Court. The plaintiff had accused Lown’s client of serious crimes in order to get the restraining order. But Lown confronted this individual with their own Facebook and Instagram posts, slowly and deliberately going through each one. This evidence and Lown’s cross examination clearly exposed the plaintiff’s falsehoods. The Honorable Judge Fitzpatrick ultimately denied the plaintiff’s request. Lown's client emerged victorious.

By a Lown Law Firm client and friend:

"I had Zachary Lown as my criminal defense attorney on a domestic case. This was in Boston. Unfortunately, our child’s mother was attempting to have me wrongly convicted of a crime. Attorney Lown summonsed key records such as DCF reports and medical records which helped establish that the other party was lying. Attorney Lown presented the case to a jury. The jury agreed that I was innocent. I am finally able to refocus on my family and employment."

After an extraordinary hearing that lasted over 4 hours, Attorney Lown prevailed on behalf of his client in the Lynn District Court. The opposing party was attempting to use a restraining order to gain leverage over a divorce proceeding that was being heard in a different court. Attorney Lown exposed the ploy. At the end of the day, Judge Jean Curran denied the restraining order. Lown’s client emerged victorious.

The green card processing time on this case was unusually fast. The spouse initially came here to study. She later fell in love with a young man who she met through friends at Grad School in Boston. The spouse was approved for conditional permanent residency in a matter of just five months.

Attorney Lown’s motion to suppress win in Boston’s downtown district court underscored an important fact: police officers do not have authority to stop and frisk someone merely because they seem “suspicious.” In this case, Attorney Lown cross-examined four officers at a 4-hour hearing. Ultimately, Judge Cathleen Byrne ruled that the officers crossed a line. She found that the officers lacked sufficient justification to search Lown’s client and that the Constitution demanded that the evidence be suppressed.

“The police treated my client like a criminal for having gotten into an accident,” Attorney Lown said. Even though the officer did not witness the accident he decided to charge the client with reckless operation of a motor vehicle to endanger lives.  “But the prosecutor was very thoughtful and open to what I had to say,” Lown added, referring to an assistant district attorney in the Chelsea District Court. Ultimately, Attorney Lown prevailed and was able to show the DA that this was an accident, not a crime. The DA agreed to drop the charges.

The victory was achieved through Attorney Lown’s cross-examination of the accuser and a brief argument to the Clerk Magistrate. The Clerk recognized that the accusations did not hold water and that they actually stemmed from a child custody dispute. This was a family issue, not a criminal matter. The clerk determined not to issue a criminal complaint against Lown’s client.

Attorney Lown won a “not guilty” jury verdict for his client who was mis-identified as the man who threatened two women with a gun. A defense expert testified that various factors such as stress lower an identification’s reliability. The jury found reason to doubt the government’s case and they delivered a quick acquittal.

A Dorchester jury deliberated today for barely 10 minutes before coming back "Not Guilty" for Attorney Lown's wrongly-accused OUI client. "The officer tried to change his story to make our client look bad, but we had him on the stand and we had him read out loud to the jury from the transcript of his testimony at a prior hearing. The jury realized that he had previously said something different and was now just trying to bolster his accusations," Lown said. This victory was clearly a huge relief for the client who had put some of his career goals on hold pending the outcome of this case.

A young man who was charged with a criminal offense was understandably concerned that a criminal charge could prevent him from driving for Uber or Lyft.  Attorney Lown convinced the judge to give him a second chance by using a legal mechanism called "pre-trial diversion."  This client had to look for a job during a brief period of supervision.  Once he held up his end of the bargain, his case was dismissed in a such a way that it did not even show up on his criminal record.

A Boston Police officer chased a young man out of a building where he was visiting his friends, slammed this young man on the ground, handcuffed him, then wrongly accused him of Resisting Arrest and Assault and Battery on a Police Officer.  The officer testified that it was the young man who was out of control.  Attorney Lown exposed the officer for changing his story on several occasions.  The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on all charges.

Police officers stopped Attorney Lown's client in Dorchester after claiming that he was acting "suspicious" while riding as a passenger in a car.  After Attorney Lown cross-examined three officers, the Honorable Judge Breen in Dorchester agreed that the officers did not have the authority to stop the car and order the client out of the vehicle.  The evidence was suppressed and the case was dismissed.

Attorney Lown won a Not Guilty in a DUI trial after his client was wrongly accused of drunk driving. This client was arrested in Dorchester by a State Trooper at around 3 AM.  Attorney Lown rigorously cross examined the Trooper and exposed his biased perspective.  The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.