Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Chambers

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided April 25, 2012No. 10-P-60Published

1DissentMcHugh, J.

I respectfully dissent because I cannot agree with the majority that, as the case unfolded, the excluded testimony of the victim’s prior violent conduct was either cumulative or marginal.

After a voir dire hearing during which she heard testimony from the defendant’s proposed witness, the judge, without objection from the Commonwealth, made a pretrial ruling that evidence of the victim’s earlier assault and robbery of the defendant’s proposed witness was admissible on the first aggressor issue. *635See Commonwealth v. Adjutant, 443 Mass. 649, 664 (2005) (specific acts of victim’s prior violent…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Yeboah-Sefah v. FiccoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009
  2. Commonwealth v. AdjutantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  3. Commonwealth v. GaynorMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2008
  4. Commonwealth v. SommerMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API