Commonwealth v. Castillo
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtTrainor, J.
The Commonwealth appeals from the allowance of a motion to suppress evidence in the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department. The Commonwealth argues that three of the judge’s factual findings are clearly erroneous because they were not supported by the evidence presented at the suppression hearing. The Commonwealth also argues that the judge erred in allowing the motion to suppress because the police officer had probable cause to believe that the defendant had sold heroin to another individual. We vacate and remand.
Background. “We summarize the facts found by the motion…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ScottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004
- Commonwealth v. YesilcimanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990
- Commonwealth v. Isaiah I.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
- Commonwealth v. SantalizMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Commonwealth v. Isaiah I.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. CawthronMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2017
- Commonwealth v. AgogoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018
- Commonwealth v. Barry A. Hanson, Jr.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2025
- Commonwealth v. Nunes-DaveigaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2019
- Commonwealth v. Rafe R.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2018
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.