Your Shield Against Criminal Prosecution
In a recent appeal from the defendant’s conviction for assault & battery for spanking his child, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the father should have been permitted to assert at trial the ‘parental privilege’ defense. See Commonwealth v. Dorvil. In this case, the defendant was charged and convicted with assault & battery for spanking his daughter, who was almost…
As you may have heard in the news lately, former New England Patriot and NFL player Brandon Spikes’ Mercedes was involved in an accident on I-495 in Foxboro, Massachusetts last week. According to the Massachusetts State Police, Spikes’ Mercedes was allegedly speeding when it crashed into the rear of a SUV. The Mercedes was located further along the road in…
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in the case of Commonwealth v. Brescia, affirmed a judge’s allowance of the defendant’s motion for new trial on the grounds of, because of the defendant’s having had an undetected stroke during the course of his testimony, this medical condition could have affected his credibility before the jury. James Brescia was tried in the Middlesex…
In the case of Commonwealth v. Rarick, the Massachusetts Appeals Court held that, evidence of alcohol consumption, speeding, along with the officer’s opinion that he was intoxicated, was sufficient to sustain a conviction for Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence of Alcohol. The defendant was stopped by police for speeding; traveling 58 mph in a 45 mph zone. Although…
The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently ruled that it is reversible error and improper for a prosecutor to suggest the defendant had the opportunity to tailor his testimony and lie because he had heard the other witnesses during trial. This issue was addressed in Commonwealth v. Alphonse, and because the error was reversible, the defendant’s conviction was reversed. The defendant was tried…
In a recent decision, the Massachusetts Appeals Court addressed the defendant’s challenge to the lawfulness of the stop of his car based on an anonymous caller’s 911 call to the police. Prior to trial, the defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence, arguing that the police did not have reliable information to seize him for suspected drunk driving. He argued…
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court considered whether evidence or documents that were provided to an attorney by the client are obtainable by prosecutors from the attorney via subpoena. The question, the court ruled, depends on whether or not the the evidence was provided to the attorney for purposes of legal assistance. This case involved circumstances where the defendant was the…
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed the issue whether a defendant, who was the object of the police investigation, may still move to suppress evidence seized from the co-defendant under the theory of “target standing”. Target standing is a legal theory that permits a defendant, who is charged with a possessory offense, such as unlawful possession of drugs or guns,…
In the recent case of Commonwealth v. Walter Crayton, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court established a new standard for the admission at trial of an in-court identification of the defendant where the witness had not, prior to trial, been asked to participate in an out of court identification procedure. The new rule imposes the burden on the Commonwealth to request.…
The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently suppressed evidence in a case that was seized as a result from an arrest by Boston Police based on mistaken information. In the case of Commonwealth v. Maingrette, the Appeals Court ruled that the arrest, based on a default warrant that was no longer active at the time of the defendant’s arrest, was unlawful and…