Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Tavares
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided April 8, 2011PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCordy, J.
The question presented in this interlocutory appeal is whether a drive-by killing in Brockton constituted a “designated offense” occurring in “connection with organized crime,” G. L. c. 272, § 99 B 4 and 7, such that oral communications of the defendant, Paulo Tavares, surreptitiously recorded by a confidential police informant, qualify for an exception to the proscription of “secret transmission or recording of oral communications without the consent of all parties” provided in the wiretap statute (G. L. c. 272, § 99). Commonwealth v. Blood, 400 Mass. 61, 66 (1987). Based on the record…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. VitelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Commonwealth v. BloodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
- Commonwealth v. D'AmourMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
- Commonwealth v. LykusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Commonwealth v. ThorpeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TavaresMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2019
- Commonwealth v. HearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Commonwealth v. MoodyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
- Commonwealth v. BurgosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Commonwealth v. MitchellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.