Commonwealth v. Moulton
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1DissentGreenberg, J.
Granting the necessary deference to the motion judge’s factual findings, I cannot see the logic of *686the majority’s conclusions in this case. The judge found that because Watts had “formed his opinion” concerning the defendant’s lack of sobriety at the scene and had essentially completed his investigation of the accident, there was no excuse for not delivering the citation prior to leaving the accident scene. Further, the record indicates that the defendant’s head wound was not so serious as to impair her memory of events or her ability to communicate with Watts. Upon the defendant’s arrival at…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BabbMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
- Commonwealth v. PappasMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- Commonwealth v. GormanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
- Commonwealth v. RussoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
- Commonwealth v. ProvostMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.