Articles Posted in Search and Seizure

A Practitioner’s Guide to the Motion to Suppress in Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Stops
Attorney Joe Serpa

In a Massachusetts prosecution that begins with a motor vehicle stop, the motion to suppress is often the filing that decides the case. Firearms, drug, and operating under the influence charges typically rest on what the police saw and seized in the minutes after the blue lights came on, and each item of evidence depends…

Continue reading ›
Chatrie v. United States: The Supreme Court Brings Geofence Warrants Under the Fourth Amendment
Attorney Joe Serpa

By Attorney Joe Serpa | Georgetown University Law Center | Massachusetts Criminal Defense Since 1995 On June 29, 2026, the United States Supreme Court held in Chatrie v. United States, No. 25-112, 609 U.S. ___ (2026), that police conducted a Fourth Amendment search when they acquired a suspect’s Google Location History data, because a person…

Continue reading ›
Your Fifth Amendment Right to Refuse to Provide Your iPhone Passcode in Massachusetts: What the Law Says
Attorney Joe Serpa

When Massachusetts law enforcement seizes a digital device and asks for the passcode, many people comply out of panic, a wish to appear cooperative, or a belief that refusing will look like guilt. That choice has consequences, and the law governing it is more precise than most summaries suggest. Three situations are frequently run together,…

Continue reading ›
Digital Search Warrants in Massachusetts: What Police Must Prove to Search Your Phone or Computer
Attorney Joe Serpa

By Attorney Joe Serpa | Georgetown University Law Center | Massachusetts Criminal Defense Since 1995 June 2026. Updated July 2026 for the Supreme Court’s geofence ruling in Chatrie v. United States. A Massachusetts search warrant for a digital device, whether a smartphone, laptop, tablet, or cloud storage account, is not a general license to search…

Continue reading ›

Client Reviews

He's one of the best people I've met. I'm really appreciative of all the help I received. If you have a serious case, he'll work hard to make sure you have the best outcome. I highly recommend him. You will not be disappointed.

A.J

Mr. Serpa was very helpful with my family member ‘s case. He was able to get it dismissed quickly and easily. He is very professional and very good at what he does. I’m so glad he hired him. You will be glad too if you hire him.

Z.M.

Serpa law office was my attorney of choice for 2 seperate cases I had last year. With both situations, Joseph not only treated me great, delivered the results I was hoping for, and was extremely professional and genuine. I would definitely recommend this law office to anyone in need of legal help.

P.C.

Contact Us

  1. 1 Individual, Hands-On Approach
  2. 2 Winning Trial Record
  3. 3 Criminal Defense Since 1995
Fill out the contact form or call us at 617.936.0201 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message

We Accept the Following Payment Solutions

Greater Boston Criminal Law Alerts

The Lindsay Clancy Trial: A Cruel and Tone Deaf Prosecution

A prosecutor decides not only what to prove but how to speak about the person sitting at the defense table. In the trial of Lindsay Clancy, the Commonwealth told the jury in its opening statement and again in closing that she was a murderer who coldly wanted to see her own children dead. It called…

The Lindsay Clancy Jury Dispute: When Massachusetts Law Permits Removal of a Deliberating Juror

Massachusetts law does not permit a trial judge to remove a deliberating juror merely because the other eleven jurors believe that person is wrong. Once deliberations begin, the judge may discharge a juror only after a hearing establishes an emergency, another compelling reason, or a demonstrated inability to perform the duties of a juror. Disagreement…

Filming Jurors in the Lindsay Clancy Trial and Massachusetts Witness Intimidation Law

An arrest after the alleged filming of jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial raises separate questions under the witness-intimidation, evidence-tampering, contempt, and wiretap laws. This analysis applies each rule without presuming the allegations are true.