Commonwealth v. Soto

In an area of the Roxbury section of Boston being investigated for drugs, the defendant was observed engaging in what police considered a drug transaction.1 She was charged and convicted of distribution of a class B controlled substance. G. L. c. 94C, § 32A(a). On appeal, she claims that the judge erred (1) in denying her motion for a required finding of not guilty; (2) in admitting hearsay and opinion evidence; and (3) in *110basing the defendant’s sentence on improper considerations.2 While we reject the defendant’s claim that she was entitled to a required finding of not guilty, we conclude…