463 Mass. 353 - Appellee Commonwealth Brief - Mass Cases

findings of guilty." Vasquez, 456 Mass. at 360,
citations omitted, emphasis added. The "essential
question" has never been whether the error might have
had an effect on the judge in ruling on a motion for
required finding of not guilty.
Moreover, the underlying claim of prejudice that
Ronald Mendes' erroneous approach is calculated to
address is perfectly capable of being addressed by
indeed is built "into -- our traditional harmless error
jurisprudence.
This Honorable Court has repeatedly taught, in
particular where the government has obtained evidence
unlawfully such that the exclusionary rule is invoked
to "deter future unlawful police conduct," Commonwealth
v. Brandwein, 435 Mass. 623, 632 (2002), or to protect
"judicial integrity," Commonwealth v. Brown, 456 Mass.
708, 715 (2010), that a reviewing court should pay
particular attention to whether "the over-all strength
of the Commonwealth's case radiates from a core of
tainted evidence." Tyree, 455 Mass. at 702 (evidence
seized during the illegal initial entry and search of
defendant's residence and his shoes, which were seized
immediately thereafter at the police station, should
have been suppressed), quoting from Degraca, 447 Mass.
29