Commonwealth v. Rosario
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
There were two confidential informers who identified the defendant Rosario to the Worcester police as a “big cocaine dealer.” The first informer had no track record with the authorities which would classify him as reliable under Aguilar-Spinelli standards.1 The second informer was reliable in the sense that his information had previously led to arrests and seizure of narcotics. From the first informer, however, the police received detailed information about an imminent sale of cocaine. Most of that detailed information the police corroborated through observation before making a search and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Draper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Commonwealth v. BorgesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Commonwealth v. CastMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Va Meng JoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Commonwealth v. Va Meng JoeMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
- Commonwealth v. MercadoMassachusetts Superior Court · 2002