Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. Vanya V.

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided October 9, 2009No. 08-P-1196Published

1ConcurrenceBerry, J.

This is a case in which, at critical points in the interaction between law enforcement and the juvenile, there were flaws that rendered the patfrisk seizure of the juvenile’s backpack and the opening of the locked bank bag enclosed therein inconsistent with the constitutional protections against warrant-less search ensured by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.

I write separately in concurrence for two reasons. First, in my judgment, there was an unconstitutional patfrisk of the juvenile. Second, I believe it is…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948

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

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

Powered by the Exa API