Commonwealth v. Pimental
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtMills, J.
The defendant appeals from his conviction on a single-count indictment charging larceny of “one or more firearms,” in violation of G. L. c. 266, § 30, and the denial of his motion for a new trial. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on the Commonwealth’s theory of the case; the judge’s failure, sua sponte, to give a specific unanimity instruction; the judge’s failure, sua sponte, to strike certain hearsay evidence; the effectiveness of counsel; and the denial of his motion for a new trial without a hearing. We affirm.
1. Factual background. The jury could have found the following…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SaferianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Commonwealth v. SatterfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Commonwealth v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Commonwealth v. GrandisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
- Commonwealth v. CurtisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SantosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
- Commonwealth v. JulienMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
- Commonwealth v. Aldrich (No. 1)Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2015
- State v. OrtizCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
- Commonwealth v. MazzantiniMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2009
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.