State v. Saucier

NORCOTT, J.,

with whom ZARELLA and SULLIVAN, Js., join, concurring in part. I agree with and join the well reasoned analysis in part II of the majority opinion. I write separately, however, because I disagree in part with the standard of review discussion contained in part I of the maj ority opinion. In my view, the ambiguous statement that confronts us in this case — “ T got Richie. I got him good.’ ” — which was made by the victim to an acquaintance in reference to the defendant, Richard Saucier, is a paradigmatic example of why we should review all purely evidentiary claims, including…