In a recent case, Commonwealth v. Pfeiffer, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the judge’s supplemental instruction on arson was erroneous, because it gave the jury the option of convicting on the grounds that the defendant intentionally failed to extinguish or report a fire which had been accidently or negligently…
In a recent decision – Commonwealth v. Quinones – the Appeals Court concluded that the trial court judge properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress his statements to the police. The Appeals Court specifically ruled (1) “that, for Miranda purposes, a juvenile’s age must be considered in determining whether the juvenile…
In a recent decision – Commonwealth v. Torres-Pagan – the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the suppression of evidence that was seized as a result of an improper patfrisk of the defendant. The basic facts were as follows. “While on patrol …, two officers observed a motor vehicle with a cracked windshield…
In Commonwealth v. Abubardar, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the defendant’s conviction of assault and battery (as a lesser included offense of attempted murder), because the judge failed to instruct the jury on the use of non-deadly force in self-defense. The background was as follows. On the basis of an…
In R.S. v. A.P.B., the Appeals Court ruled that the evidence was insufficient to support the judge’s issuance of a harassment prevention order against the defendant pursuant to G.L. c.258E. The background was as follows. “The parties, who were students at the same college, had previously had a romantic relationship.…
In Commonwealth v. Hart, the Appeals Court affirmed the suppression of evidence discovered during the execution of a search warrant. In its decision, the Court opined that “a single observation of a firearm in [the defendant’s] residence sixty days prior to the application for [the] warrant [did] not establish probable…
The SJC ruled in Commonwealth v. Colon (1) that the judge erred in restricting the defendant’s presence at the voir dire of the deliberating jurors by depriving him of a translator; and (2) that, henceforth, in cases of murder, sexual offenses against children, and rape, “where a defendant … requests individual…
In Commonwealth v. Almonor, which “raises an issue of first impression in Massachusetts,” the Supreme Judicial Court opined that the warrantless “police action causing [the defendant’s] cell phone to reveal its real-time location constitute[d] a search in the constitutional sense under … art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.”…
In Commonwealth v. Tejada, the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the allowance of the defendant’s motion to revise and revoke his sentence under Mass. R. Crim. P. 29(a)(2), “based upon the disparity between the defendant’s sentence and a coventurer’s sentence subsequently imposed by a different judge.” The background was as follows.…
In Commonwealth v. Williams (), the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the denial of the defendant’s motion for post-conviction forensic testing of evidence pursuant to G.L. c.278A on the ground that the statute is applicable to the defendant, who claimed that no crime occurred and, therefore, that he was factually innocent…