Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Bettencourt

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided June 6, 1985PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant points to three evidentiary rulings of the trial judge which he claims were erroneous, any one of which, he says, was sufficiently prejudicial to require reversal. We have reviewed the rulings and the context in which they were made, and we perceive no prejudicial error.

1. Polygraph. Four days after the incident, the defendant went voluntarily to the New Bedford police station to answer questions. Over the course of *924the six hours of interrogation he gave three mutually inconsistent accounts of his whereabouts and activities around the time of the incident. At some point during…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. GrazianoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Commonwealth v. a JuvenileMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  3. Commonwealth v. VitelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  4. Commonwealth v. KeizerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  5. Commonwealth v. MurphyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. CordleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  2. Commonwealth v. MarreroMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  3. Commonwealth v. BrusgulisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
  4. Commonwealth v. GonzalezMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  5. Commonwealth v. RaedyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API