Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Brady

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided November 3, 2003No. 02-P-452PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcHugh, J.

After the defendants, Paul Brady and Marilyn Coussoule, waived their rights to a trial by jury on complaints charging them with larceny of property having a value in excess of $250, see G. L. c. 266, § 30, witnesses were sworn and the trial began. The charges arose out of the defendants’ alleged removal of an ornate door from a showroom and warehouse they had occupied. Doormakers by trade, the defendants had *785installed the door when they first occupied the premises. The Commonwealth claimed that they had removed it upon their eviction, replacing it with an ill-fitting door of far less…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Commonwealth v. LatimoreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  3. Commonwealth v. DuquetteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  4. Commonwealth v. FernandesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
  5. Kater v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Rhodes v. WrightIndiana Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Commonwealth v. CastilloMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  3. Commonwealth v. MonteiroMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2009
  4. Commonwealth v. McKenzieMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API