463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases
463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases 463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ISSUES PRESENTED STATEMENT OF THE CASE Prior Proceedings Statement of the Facts TABLE OF CONTENTS The Commonwealth's Case The Defendant's Case SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ARGUMENT I. THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS SUPPORTED BY PROBABLE CAUSE AND A SUFFICIENT NEXUS BETWEEN THE DEFENDANT'S CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND THE PALCE TO BE SEARCHED. A. Probable Cause B. Nexus II. THE ADMISSION OF THE CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. 22 A. Legal Standards 22 1. The Chapman Standard Remains The Touchstone For Harmless Error Analysis Under Both State And Federal Law. 22 2. This Court Has Consistently Applied The Degraca Factors To Determine Whether A Melendez-Diaz Error Was Harmless. 25 3. A Reviewing Court Can Always Consider Whether The Strength Of The Commonwealth's Case "Radiates From A Core Of Tainted Evidence." 28 ii 1 2 2 4 4 10 14 16 16 20
B. Applying the Degraca/Mahdi Factors, The Record Demonstrates Beyond A Reasonable Doubt That The Admission Of The Certificate of Analysis Was Harmless Error As To Ronald Mendes. III. THERE WAS NO SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE IN THE EVIDENCE CONCERNING CALLS PLACED TO RAYMOND MENDES'S CELL PHONE. 44 CONCLUSION ADDENDUM A. Detective Hyde's Testimony Concerning The Calls Placed To The Cellular Phones Was Not Hearsay And Did Not Implicate Confrontation Clause Protections. B. There Was No Violation Of The Wiretap Statute. ii 37 46 47 50
- Page 1: COMMONWEALTH OF .MASSACHUSETTS SUPR
- Page 5 and 6: Cases Commonwealth v. Degraca, 447
- Page 7 and 8: Cases Commonwealth v. Todisco, 363
- Page 9 and 10: COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPRE
- Page 11 and 12: The defendants moved to suppress ev
- Page 13: in a primarily residential neighbor
- Page 17: informants are used in drug investi
- Page 20 and 21: (an eighth of an·ounce of cocaine)
- Page 23: etween the defendants' drug dealing
- Page 26 and 27: 431 (1992), or the informant has pr
- Page 28 and 29: Blake, 413 Mass. 823, 828 (1992). N
- Page 31 and 32: Fifth Amendment violation can be ha
- Page 34 and 35: This test has been applied repeated
- Page 36 and 37: factors call for the reviewing Cour
- Page 38 and 39: at 554, If the overall strength of
- Page 40: counsel for Ronald Mendes actually
- Page 43 and 44: This circumstance fits comfortably
- Page 45 and 46: seized. But the testimony of the de
- Page 48: client is going to concede that he
- Page 51 and 52: Westbrooks, 79 Mass. App. Ct. 417,
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES<br />
ISSUES PRESENTED<br />
STATEMENT OF THE CASE<br />
Prior Proceedings<br />
Statement of the Facts<br />
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
The <strong>Commonwealth</strong>'s Case<br />
The Defendant's Case<br />
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT<br />
ARGUMENT<br />
I. THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS SUPPORTED BY PROBABLE<br />
CAUSE AND A SUFFICIENT NEXUS BETWEEN THE<br />
DEFENDANT'S CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND THE PALCE<br />
TO BE SEARCHED.<br />
A. Probable Cause<br />
B. Nexus<br />
II. THE ADMISSION OF THE CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS<br />
WAS HARMLESS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. 22<br />
A. Legal Standards 22<br />
1. The Chapman Standard Remains The<br />
Touchstone For Harmless Error Analysis<br />
Under Both State And Federal Law. 22<br />
2. This Court Has Consistently Applied The<br />
Degraca Factors To Determine Whether A<br />
Melendez-Diaz Error Was Harmless. 25<br />
3. A Reviewing Court Can Always Consider<br />
Whether The Strength Of The<br />
<strong>Commonwealth</strong>'s Case "Radiates From A<br />
Core Of Tainted Evidence." 28<br />
ii<br />
1<br />
2<br />
2<br />
4<br />
4<br />
10<br />
14<br />
16<br />
16<br />
20
Change language