Commonwealth v. Rivera
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtKafker, J.
At issue is the March, 2006, amendment to the witness intimidation statute, G. L. c. 268, § 13B. See St. 2006, c. 48, § 3 (2006 amendment or amendment). The primary argument raised by the defendant, Josef R. Rivera, is that the amended statute, G. L. c. 268, § 13B(l)(c), as appearing in St. 2006, c. 48, § 3, requires that the Commonwealth prove that the target of the intimidating conduct actually be frightened and reluctant to testify in order for the crime of intimidation *531to occur. As we conclude that the elements of intimidation are defined, both before and after the amendment, by the acts,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Simon v. SolomonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- United States v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Commonwealth v. RobinsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
- Commonwealth v. McCrearyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Commonwealth v. McClendonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Commonwealth v. FigueroaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
- Hrycenko v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
- Commonwealth v. PaquetteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2016
- Commonwealth v. FortunaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.