Commonwealth v. Beauregard
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
The words in question were not offered under the hospital records exception to the hearsay rule, G. L. c. 233, § 79, because they did not relate to treatment and medical history. See Bouchie v. Murray, 376 Mass. 524, 528 *984(1978). To qualify as a prior inconsistent statement by the victim, it must be shown that the words were attributable to the victim. Wingate v. Emery Air Freight Corp .,385 Mass. 402, 405 (1982). Commonwealth v. Happnie, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 193, 199 (1975). Commonwealth v. Sampson, 7 Mass. App. Ct. 514, 520-521 (1979). This the defendant sought to prove through the testimony (on…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bouchie v. MurrayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Commonwealth v. WestMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
- Wingate v. Emery Air Freight Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Commonwealth v. HeskethMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Commonwealth v. SimmondsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Commonwealth v. FigueroaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
- Commonwealth v. EvansMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
- Commonwealth v. FazzinoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1989
- Commonwealth v. SmithMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
- Blake v. HendricksonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.