Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Remedor

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided October 3, 2001No. 99-P-850PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreenberg, J.

On their appeal from convictions of trafficking in cocaine, the defendants assert that mistakes made by the trial judge during the instructional phase of the case require a new trial. The defendant, Joseph Remedor, contends that there was enough evidence of inducement to raise an entrapment defense and that the judge should have so instructed the jury. The defendant, Patrick Paul, claims that the judge gave a misleading answer to a question posed by the jury that wrongfully undercut his Bowden defense (Commonwealth v. Bowden, 379 Mass. 472 [1980]).

1. The case. For the basic facts, we turn…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BowdenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
  2. Commonwealth v. AmiraultMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  3. Commonwealth v. MirandaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  4. Commonwealth v. BloodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  5. United States v. Stuart SteinbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. AlvarezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2018
  2. Commonwealth v. MartinezMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  3. Commonwealth v. RaglandMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2008
  4. Commonwealth v. Abdul-KareemMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
  5. Commonwealth v. DoyleMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006

5 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