Commonwealth v. Robert Amaral
Massachusetts Court of Appeals
January 6, 2011
Docket No: 09-P-1683
Assault and Battery, Self-Defense, Evidence, Prior Violent Conduct
The Fall River Division of the District Court convicted the defendant of assault and battery following a bench trial. The defendant appealed, asserting that 1) the trial judge erred in restricting cross-examination regarding the victim's training and experience as a boxer and martial artist to establish that the victim was the first aggressor; and 2) the restitution order entered by the judge violates his Due Process rights because it was based on evidence that failed to comply with G.L. c. 233, sec 78G. Both issues were affirmed.
Showing posts with label Assault and Battery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Assault and Battery. Show all posts
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Com. v. Roderiques
Commonwealth v. Roderiques
Massachusetts Appeals Court
January 5, 2011
78 Mass. App. Ct. 515
Assault and Battery, Wanton or Reckless Conduct, Reckless Endangerment of a Child, Lesser included offense, Request for jury instructions, Expert Opinion
A grand jury issued two indictments against the defendant –assault and battery upon a child under fourteen years of age causing substantial bodily injury and wantonly and recklessly permitting an assault and battery upon a child that caused the child substantial bodily injury. Per the defendant’s request, the trial judge gave an instruction on reckless endangerment of a child as a lesser included offense of second charge. The jury found the defendant guilty of reckless endangerment of a child. The defendant filed a motion to vacate the conviction, which was denied. On appeal, the defendant argued that reckless endangerment is not a lesser included offense and that the Commonwealth’s expert offered an impermissible opinion about an ultimate issue in the case. The judgment was affirmed.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
January 5, 2011
78 Mass. App. Ct. 515
Assault and Battery, Wanton or Reckless Conduct, Reckless Endangerment of a Child, Lesser included offense, Request for jury instructions, Expert Opinion
A grand jury issued two indictments against the defendant –assault and battery upon a child under fourteen years of age causing substantial bodily injury and wantonly and recklessly permitting an assault and battery upon a child that caused the child substantial bodily injury. Per the defendant’s request, the trial judge gave an instruction on reckless endangerment of a child as a lesser included offense of second charge. The jury found the defendant guilty of reckless endangerment of a child. The defendant filed a motion to vacate the conviction, which was denied. On appeal, the defendant argued that reckless endangerment is not a lesser included offense and that the Commonwealth’s expert offered an impermissible opinion about an ultimate issue in the case. The judgment was affirmed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)