Commonwealth v. Smith
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1DissentBrown, J.
In my view, this is an easy case. There is no issue here of misidentification. The only question is whether the defendant participated in the destruction of the fence. 1. The defendant admits that he was present at the alleged incident. The victim identified the defendant "as being one of the eight youths who participated in the alleged destruction.” That much is quite clear from the rather inartfully drawn bill of exceptions. Thus, contrary to the defendant’s contention, there is no issue of misidentification to which the question "as to what description of the defendant was written down…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BettencourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
- Commonwealth v. BarrasMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1975
- Commonwealth v. McGrathMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971