Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Grinkley

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided November 23, 2009No. 08-P-1170PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKafker, J.

Irrelevant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) statistics and improper appeals to juror emotions by the prosecutor needlessly complicated the convictions of the defendant, Michael Grinkley, for indecent assault and battery on a child. Nonetheless, overwhelming evidence of guilt — the defendant was found in bed with his pants down, on top of one young victim and beside the other — and a discerning jury, who acquitted the defendant on rape and other charges, rendered the errors harmless. We therefore affirm.

This case arises from several incidents of sexual assault in*799volving the defendant and two…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Commonwealth v. KozecMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  3. Commonwealth v. LaniganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  4. Commonwealth v. BradshawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  5. Commonwealth v. JonesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BizanowiczMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
  2. Commonwealth v. OlmandeMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2013
  3. Commonwealth v. MorrisMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API