Robert M. Goldstein
Top rated White Collar Crimes attorney in Boston, Massachusetts
Goldstein Law Firm
Practice Areas: White Collar Crimes, Criminal Defense, General Litigation; view more
Licensed in Massachusetts since: 1995
Education: Harvard Law School
Selected to Super Lawyers: 2012 - 2024 
Selected to Rising Stars: 2007 - 2008, 2010 Details
A graduate of Harvard Law School, Robert M. Goldstein is the founding partner of Goldstein Law Firm, located in Boston, Massachusetts. Mr. Goldstein has over 25 years of legal experience with criminal litigation, white collar crimes and civil litigation. He represents clients in Suffolk, Norfolk, Middlesex, Essex, Plymouth, Bristol and every other Massachusetts county, as well as Federal Courts in Massachusetts and across the country.
Over the course of his career, Mr. Goldstein has attained successful results for numerous clients in state and federal courts. As a criminal attorney, he has represented clients in a wide range of matters, including financial fraud, environmental issues, expert control violations, government investigations, health care fraud, public corruption and tax disputes. He is also an experienced civil litigator.
Mr. Goldstein has obtained dismissals or acquittals in many significant cases. In a sign of his good standing within the legal profession, his clients have included attorneys and law enforcement professionals facing criminal or professional misconduct charges, as well as executives at Fortune 500 companies, elected politicians, members of academia, small and medium sized business owners, financial services professionals and real estate developers and professionals. He is a dedicated advocate and passionate about fighting for the rights of those accused of a crime.
“The Best Lawyers in America” has repeatedly listed Mr. Goldstein in its publication, he regularly speaks on legal panels, and he has taught trial practice as an adjunct professor.
A graduate of Harvard Law School (LL.M. 2014) and Suffolk University Law School (JD 1995), Mr. Goldstein holds a license to practice law before all state and federal courts in Massachusetts.
Practice areas
Criminal Defense: White Collar, Criminal Defense, General LitigationFocus areas
Criminal Law, Criminal Law - Federal, Litigation, White Collar Crime
- 80% Criminal Defense: White Collar
- 10% Criminal Defense
- 10% General Litigation
First Admitted: 1995
Professional Webpage: https://www.goldstein-lawfirm.com/robert-m-goldstein.html
- Massachusetts
- United States v. Warshak
- Harvard Law School, LL.M. 2014
- The Best Lawyers in America and Super Lawyers
- Harvard Law School, LL.M, 2014
- Suffolk University Law School, JD, 1995
- In Warshak v. United States, a case litigated by Martin G. Weinberg and Mr. Goldstein, a target of a government investigation filed a civil suit and sought injunctive relief, asserting that the government’s use of the Act violated his Fourth Amendment rights to the extent that it allowed the government to seize and search his e-mails without establishing probable cause, without a judicially issued search warrant, and without any particularity. In granting Steven Warshak a preliminary injunction, the Honorable Susan J. Dlott, in a case of first impression, concluded that Warshak had “shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his Fourth Amendment claim,” and preliminarily held that particular sections of the Act violate the Fourth Amendment “to the extent that they collectively authorize the ex parte issuance of search and seizure orders without a warrant and on less than a showing of probable cause.”, The Stored Communications Act and Private E-Mail Communications
- Mr. Goldstein was one of the lead attorneys in United States v. Warshak (December 14, 2010), wherein the Sixth Circuit ruled that the government cannot seize emails from a citizen’s ISP without first securing a warrant where the citizen exhibits a subjective expectation of privacy in those emails. Characterizing the question of “reasonable expectation of privacy” as “one of grave import and enduring consequence,” the court held, as a general matter, that a subscriber does indeed enjoy “a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of emails ‘that are stored with, or sent or received through, a commercial ISP.’” Given this foundational ruling, the court held that the “government may not compel a commercial ISP to turn over the contents of a subscriber’s emails without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause,” and the SCA is therefore unconstitutional “to the extent that the SCA purports to permit the government to obtain such emails warrantlessly.”, co-author, Search and Seizure Commentary: Stored Communications Act Unconstitutional To Extent It Permits Warrantless Seizure of Emails From ISP
Selections
- Super Lawyers: 2012 - 2024
- Rising Stars: 2007 - 2008, 2010
