Cox and Powers, PA, Attorneys at Law, Serving Western Massachusetts

Our Attorneys:

Jennifer E. Cox view bio
Leslie H. Powers view bio

Briefs:

Family Court Decision - 2017
Attorney Powers represented Mother in a custody case. In the middle of that case, Attorney Powers was able to dispose of a grandparent’s┬ávisitation action brought by the paternal grandmother with the filing of the Motion to Dismiss.
posted Thu, May 10, 2018

Family Court Decision - 2017
Attorney Powers represented an unmarried Father after the Mother removed the child without notice to Connecticut.
posted Thu, May 10, 2018

Family Court Decision - 2017
posted Thu, May 10, 2018

Criminal Defense Decision - OUI - 2016
Attorney Powers successfully argued that an Operating Under the Influence (second offense) should be dismissed
posted Thu, May 10, 2018

Family Court Decision - 2015
Attorney Powers, after trial, succeeded at getting a 50-50 parenting plan for Father with neither party paying the other support.
posted Thu, May 10, 2018

Go to News...

Criminal Defense Decisions - Drugs

In two recent drug-related criminal cases, Attorney Jennifer Cox successfully argued for dismissal of Superior Court indictments

In two recent drug-related criminal cases, Attorney Jennifer Cox successfully argued for dismissal of Superior Court indictments.    Attorney Cox filed motions to dismiss in both cases arguing that there was insufficient evidence that her clients possessed illegal drugs or participated in the illegal distribution of drugs.

In one of the cases, Attorney Cox’s client was present during the execution of a search warrant.  As a result of being present, the Commonwealth argued that the client was a participant, known as a joint venturer, in the manufacturing and distribution of drugs found in the apartment.  However, Attorney Cox argued that there was no evidence that her client was a resident of the apartment where drugs were sold.  There was also evidence that the police drug task unit sprayed a fluorescent powder on money used by police informant to buy drugs. The powder is not visible to the naked eye but illuminates when exposed to a black light.  So, the police could easily track whoever handled the “buy money”.  Attorney Cox argued that the powder was not found on the client’s hands or clothing.  Case was ultimately dismissed as a result of Attorney Cox’s Motion to Dismiss.

In the second case, Attorney Cox’s client was a passenger in a car where drugs were found in the center console.  Attorney Cox successfully argued that the evidence did not support a finding that her client had constructive possession of the drugs found.  And consequently her client was not involved in distribution of drugs.   Police Officers observed the driver of the car make multiple sales of drugs.  The client was not present during the observed transactions.  Soon thereafter, the driver picked up the client at an unrelated location.  Police Officers followed the driver.   After the parties left the car, police approached and arrested the driver and passenger.  Attorney Cox successfully argued that there was no evidence that her client knew of the driver’s actions prior to being picked up, there was no attempt to sell drugs while client was in car and that all the drugs found were concealed in the center console to which the client did not have access nor did he know what it contained.  Case was dismissed by judge after hearing.

Posted: to General News on Mon, Mar 2, 2015
Updated: Mon, Mar 2, 2015