You Just Got Charged. Here's What You Need to Know.

For over 30 years, we have helped people through exactly what you're experiencing right now. You don't have to face this alone. If you're looking at this page, you may have just received charging documents citing Massachusetts G.L. c. 209A, § 7. Understanding exactly what this charge means under Massachusetts law, and what the prosecution must prove against you, is the first step toward protecting yourself.

Call (978) 969-2890 for a free consultation.

What Does G.L. c. 209A, § 7 Prohibit?

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 209A, Section 7 makes it a crime to knowingly violate a civil abuse prevention order, commonly called a restraining order. The order itself is civil, issued in a separate court proceeding, but violating its terms is a distinct criminal offense. You do not need to be convicted, or even charged, with any underlying abuse to be charged with a violation.

Not every provision written into a 209A order carries criminal penalties if violated. Only violations of specific provisions are criminal: an order to refrain from abusing the protected person, an order not to contact the protected person directly or indirectly, an order to stay a specific distance away, an order to vacate and remain away from a shared household, or an order to remain away from the protected person's workplace or a child's school.

A conviction under this statute is separate from, and can be pursued in addition to, any charge for the underlying conduct itself, such as assault and battery. The protected person does not control whether the case proceeds. Once a violation is reported, the decision to prosecute belongs to the Commonwealth, not to the person who obtained the order.

For the restraining order itself, including the hearing after notice and how an order is extended, changed or appealed, see our pages on being served with a 209A restraining order and Massachusetts restraining orders.

What the Prosecution Must Prove

To convict you under G.L. c. 209A, § 7, the Commonwealth must prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Under the Massachusetts Model Jury Instructions, the prosecution must prove four elements:

A Valid Court Order Existed: A court had issued a 209A order directing you to refrain from abusing, refrain from contacting, stay a specific distance away, vacate and remain away from a household, or remain away from a workplace or school.

The Order Was in Effect: The order was in effect on the date the violation allegedly occurred.

You Violated a Specific Term: You violated the order through the specific prohibited conduct alleged, such as contacting the protected person or failing to stay away.

You Knew the Order's Terms: You knew the pertinent terms of the order were in effect, either because you received a copy of it or learned of its terms some other way.

The Commonwealth must prove ALL four elements, including that you actually knew the order's terms. Weakness in proving any single element, especially knowledge of the specific terms allegedly violated, can be the foundation of your defense.

Penalties for Violating a 209A Order Under Massachusetts Law

Penalties

Under G.L. c. 209A, § 7, every violation carries the same maximum penalty, regardless of whether it is a first offense:
● Up to 2.5 years in a house of correction
● A fine of up to $5,000, with both fine and imprisonment possible, plus a mandatory additional $25 fine

GPS Monitoring and Exclusion Zones

As an alternative to incarceration and as a condition of probation, a court may prohibit contact with the protected person by establishing geographic exclusion zones around the protected person's home, workplace, or a child's school, and may order the defendant to wear a GPS tracking device. If the device shows the defendant entering an exclusion zone, that location data is transmitted to the protected person and to police.

Firearms: Suspension and Surrender

A 209A order can also reach your firearms, and it happens in two stages under two different standards.

When the emergency order issues

When a temporary or emergency order issues, section 3B requires the court to suspend your license to carry or FID card and order you to surrender all firearms and ammunition you own, possess, or control, but only if the person seeking the order demonstrates a substantial likelihood of immediate danger of abuse. It is not automatic on every order. Law enforcement takes possession when they serve you.

When the order is continued

When the order is later continued or modified, section 3C requires a separate determination: whether returning your license, firearms, or ammunition would present a likelihood of abuse. That is a different question from the one asked at the emergency stage, decided on a different record, and a surrender order under section 3C lasts as long as the underlying restraining order.

Violating a surrender order

Violating a suspension or surrender order is its own offense, separate from violating the order itself, punishable by up to two and a half years in a house of correction, a fine of up to $5,000, or both.

Two deadlines to know

Section 3B lets any defendant aggrieved by a surrender or suspension order petition the issuing court for review, and that petition must be heard within ten court business days.

If you file an affidavit that a firearm or ammunition is required in your work and request an expedited hearing, the court must hold one within two business days, limited to the surrender and suspension question. If your job depends on carrying a firearm, that is the provision to act on immediately.

Harassment prevention orders

A harassment prevention order under chapter 258E works the same way, under sections 4A and 4B of that chapter.

Your gun license: a separate ban

Separately from the surrender order itself, the firearms licensing statute imposes its own disqualification. Under c. 140, section 121F(j)(iii), you are a prohibited person while you are currently subject to a suspension or surrender order under section 3B or 3C, to a permanent or temporary protection order under chapter 209A, or to a permanent or temporary harassment prevention order under chapter 258E.

Being a prohibited person means a licensing authority must deny any application or renewal, and under section 121F(u)(1) must revoke or suspend a license, card, or permit you already hold once the disqualifying event occurs. It is mandatory, not discretionary.

Getting a license back

Two further points come from section 121F(u)(2). The pendency of court proceedings does not stay a revocation or suspension. And a revoked or suspended license may be reinstated only when all disqualifying conditions have ended, so ending the restraining order alone will not restore it if something else disqualifies you.

Notices, and appealing a denial

Notices of revocation and suspension go to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services and the Commissioner of Probation and enter the criminal justice information system.

If your application or renewal is denied, section 121F(v)(2) allows a petition for judicial review in the district court within 90 days, unless a hearing was already held under chapter 209A or chapter 258E.

Collateral Consequences

● A permanent criminal record that appears on background checks
● Potential impact on employment opportunities
● Possible effects on professional licenses
● Immigration consequences for non-citizens
● Loss of the right to possess firearms
● Impact on custody or family court proceedings
● Possible court-ordered completion of a certified batterer's intervention program as a condition of probation

Related Criminal Charges

● G.L. c. 258E, § 9: Violation of a Harassment Prevention Order: The counterpart charge for violating a civil order between people who are not family or household members; same penalty structure
● G.L. c. 265, § 13M: Domestic Assault and Battery: Often charged alongside a violation when the alleged conduct also involved physical contact
● G.L. c. 265, § 13A(b)(iii): Assault and Battery on a Person Protected by an Abuse Prevention Order, a related but distinct and more serious felony-eligible charge
● G.L. c. 265, § 43: Stalking: Carries an enhanced, mandatory-minimum penalty if the stalking conduct also violates a 209A order
● G.L. c. 275, § 2: Threat to Commit a Crime: A related, less serious threat-based charge
● G.L. c. 268, § 13B: a Intimidation of a Witness

Related Practice Area:

Our Domestic Assault and Battery Practice Area Overview, sometimes charged if the alleged victim is also a witness in another case involving the defendant

Defending Against a 209A Violation Charge

These cases are fact-specific, and the right defense depends on the circumstances of your case. The Commonwealth must prove that an order existed, that you knew its terms, and that you violated one of them.

The questions below are the ones that most often decide a violation charge.

Did you know about the order and its terms?

The Commonwealth has to prove you knew the relevant terms of the order were in effect. Being served with the order is strong evidence of that, but it is not the only way to prove it. The courts have held that a person can know the terms without being handed the order, for example because the protected person or the police told them what it said.

So the questions are practical ones. Were you served, and how? If not, what exactly were you told, by whom, and when? Where there is no proof of service and no reliable evidence of what you were told, knowledge can become the central question in the case.

Was the contact accidental, or part of something you were allowed to do?

Running into the protected person somewhere you did not know, and could not reasonably have known, they would be is not a violation. But you have to end the encounter, by leaving, as soon as reasonably possible. When there is evidence of an accidental encounter, the Commonwealth has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the contact was not accidental, or that you did not take reasonable steps to end it.

The same principle covers brief, civil contact that is incidental to something you are permitted to do, such as attending a court hearing, or arranging a visit with your children that a court has allowed. That contact cannot become an occasion to argue, harass or threaten. Courts look at how long it lasted, what was said, how often it happened, and whether the stated reason was a pretext.

A chance encounter does not make everything that follows accidental. Choosing to start or continue a conversation is a deliberate act, whoever spoke first.

Did you actually make the contact?

If someone else contacted the protected person, the Commonwealth has to prove that you intended that contact or shared that intent. A friend or relative acting on their own is not you.

The reverse is also true: a no-contact order cannot be avoided by passing messages through other people. And whether a message reached the protected person matters. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed a conviction where there was no evidence that the calls ever reached the protected person or that she knew about them before trial.

Which term of the order is at issue?

The charge depends on the specific term you are accused of violating. A no-contact or stay-away violation does not require proof that anyone was frightened. A violation of the term ordering you not to abuse the protected person requires proof of abuse as the 209A statute defines it, which is more than contact alone.

Only the terms of the 209A order itself count. The courts have held that a separate family court order cannot be read into the 209A order to expand what is criminal.

What is not a defense

It helps to know this early. The Commonwealth does not have to prove that you meant to violate the order, only that you knew of it and did the act voluntarily.

It is generally not a defense that the order should never have been issued. The place to challenge an order is the civil case, by asking the court to change or end it. There are narrow exceptions, such as where a person had no real notice of the order or no opportunity to comply.

And do not assume that an invitation from the protected person protects you. The order restricts you, not them, and courts have upheld violation charges where the protected person invited the contact.

The evidence itself

Beyond these questions, the proof matters: whether messages can actually be tied to you, what phone records show about who contacted whom and when, and what any witnesses saw. An experienced criminal defense attorney can evaluate the specific facts of your case and identify the strongest approach.

What To Do Right Now

If you've just been charged with violating a restraining order, here's what you need to know:
‍
● Don't talk to police beyond basic identification. Anything you say can be used against you
● Don't contact the alleged victim: any contact could result in additional charges
● Don't discuss your case on social media or with anyone except your attorney
● Preserve any evidencesuch as text messages, call logs, or anything showing who initiated contact and when
● Write down everything you remember while it's fresh, including exactly what happened and any prior contact from the protected person

‍Contact an experienced Massachusetts criminal defense attorney immediately.

‍Call (978) 969-2890. We answer 24/7.

Massachusetts G.L. c. 209A, § 7: Violation of an Abuse Prevention Order