463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases

More documents

Recommendations

Info

431 (1992), or the informant has provided information which has led to an arrest and the seizure of controlled substances, Commonwealth v. Perez-Baez, 410 Mass. 43, 45-46 (1991), (2) the informant's information was confirmed through police observed controlled buys with the target, Commonwealth v. O'Day, 440 Mass. 296, 301(2003), (3) the informant provided admissions against his or her own penal interests, see Commonwealth v. Parapar, 404 Mass. 319, 322 (1989), (4) the informant's "identity" and "whereabouts" are known, Commonwealth v. Alfonso A., 438 Mass. 372, 375 (2003), (5) there are multiple informants providing mutually corroborating information corresponding in significant detail as to methods of operation and location of the drug trafficking base, Commonwealth v. Ilges, 64 Mass. App. Ct. at 503, 509-510 (2005), (6) the informant provided significant detail as to both the identity of the seller and the drug selling operation, Alfonso A., 438 Mass. at 374-375, or (7) the police made independent observations confirming the informant's information, Commonwealth v. Germain, 396 Mass. 413, 418 (1985). Here, as the motion judge concluded, (RayM. R.A. 12-13), the veracity of informant "A" ("CSA") was well- 18
established. Additionally, as can be seen in the impounded record appendix, CSA's identity and place of residence were both known to Detective Hyde at the time he drafted the supporting affidavit. (I.R.A. 6.) See Welch, 420 Mass. at 651 (reliability. "may be bolstered by the fact that the police know the informant's identity and address or telephone number and would be able to contact him or her"). With respect to the veracity of the second informant "B" ("CSB"), Detective Hyde knew this person's identity and residence, (I.R.A. 6,) and that CSB had previously provided information which had led to an arrest and narcotics prosecution. (I.R.A. 6.) See Parapar, 404 Mass. at 322. CSA provided Detective Hyde with very detailed information, based upon first hand knowledge, about the defendants' drug activity, (see I.R.A. 6-7), which in turn was well-corroborated, by similar information provided by CSB, (see I.R.A. 8), by police observation, and by CSB's two controlled buys with the defendants, both within seven days of the application for the search warrant. (I.R.A. 6-8). See Commonwealth v. Warren, 418 Mass. 86, 89 (1994). All of this was sufficient to establish probable cause. Alfonso A., 438 Mass. at 376; Commonwealth v. 19
Page 1 and 2: COMMONWEALTH OF .MASSACHUSETTS SUPR
Page 3 and 4: B. Applying the Degraca/Mahdi Facto
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 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,
Page 53 and 54: of the statements made by the calle
Page 55 and 56: phones were used as instrumentaliti
Page 57 and 58: In factually analogous cases, the A

463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?