OUI Vehicle Massachusetts License Revocation Discovery Essex County
OUI Vehicle Massachusetts License Revocation Discovery Essex County
Commonwealth v. Victor
Facts:
At the conclusion of a bifurcated trial in the Essex Superior Court Department (Massachusetts), defendant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, seventh offense, under Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 90, § 24(1)(a)(1); operating to endanger under Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 90, § 24(2)(a); and operating after revocation of his license under Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 90, § 23. Defendant appealed.
OUI Vehicle Massachusetts License Revocation Discovery
Issue:
- Whether judge improperly applied the doctrine of inevitable discovery and abused the decision?
Discussions:
Defendant challenged the pretrial denial of his motion to suppress, contending that the motion judge improperly applied the doctrine of inevitable discovery and abused her discretion by denying defendant’s request to renew the motion to suppress. Defendant argued that the officer who stopped his vehicle lacked jurisdictional authority to stop him in another town and that the substantial incriminating evidence resulting from the stop should have been inadmissible because neither statutory nor common-law sources permitted an extraterritorially stop under the circumstances. The appellate court found no error, noting that defendant at excessive speed drove into an oncoming lane and forced the first police cruiser to drive off the road in order to avoid a head-on collision. The officer began pursuit and directed his dispatcher to inform a neighboring town of the chase and need for assistance. The officer forced defendant to pull over after a short chase and took defendant’s keys and driver’s license. As he did so, the officer from the neighboring town, where the stop occurred, took over. Those facts established the practical certainty of discovery of defendant by the second officer.
The Gilmore & Sris Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your OUI case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your OUI case. A Massachusetts lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your OUI case in Massachusetts and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have a client meeting location in Cambridge.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
OUI Intoxication Massachusetts Injury Aggravated Battery Assault Lawyers Essex County
OUI Intoxication Massachusetts Injury Aggravated Battery Assault Lawyers Essex County
Commonwealth v. Theresa
Facts:
Defendant was convicted in the Essex Superior Court Department (Massachusetts) of involuntary manslaughter, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265, § 13, aggravated assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon, an automobile, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265, § 15A(c)(i), and operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor and causing serious bodily injury, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 90, § 24L(2). He appealed his convictions.
OUI Intoxication Massachusetts Injury Aggravated Battery Assault Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether Counsel’s failure to seek an instruction on accident was ineffective assistance?
Discussions:
Defendant said admitting his breathalyzer test results without explanatory expert testimony negated his alcohol-related convictions. The appellate court held the convictions had to be reversed because (1) the Commonwealth sought no instruction on the per se theory of operating under the influence, but, rather, sought an instruction that the results let the jury infer operating under the influence, and (2) expert testimony did not explain the link between blood alcohol content and impairment, so the elements of operating under the influence were not proved. This did not require reversal of the involuntary manslaughter or aggravated assault and battery convictions because (1) the jury was instructed accurately on those crimes’ elements, which did not relate to alcohol impairment, and (2) neither the prosecutor’s argument nor the instructions suggested such impairment equaled or increased the probability of manslaughter or aggravated assault and battery. Counsel’s failure to seek an instruction on accident was not ineffective assistance because evidence of defendant’s wilful, wanton, or reckless conduct showed he was not entitled to the instruction.
The Gilmore & Sris Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your OUI case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your OUI case. A Massachusetts lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your OUI case in Massachusetts and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have a client meeting location in Cambridge.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
