Commonwealth v. Vaida, 10-P-1228 (MACA)
“Here, although the prosecution improperly disclosed the tape after it had rested, the defense had not begun to present its case and had ample time to review the contents of the videotape or to request a continuance if it so desired. The judge was within his discretion to find that no prejudice resulted from the delay. See Commonwealth v. Molina, 454 Mass. 232, 236 (2009); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 381 Mass. 90, 114 (1980). The exclusion of the tape's 360-degree views of the bloodied walls of the apartment benefited the defendant.”
Related Articles
Commonwealth v. Thompson, 10-P-26 (MACA)
“Viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, see Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671, 677 (1979), the evidence of the scar was sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to infer beyond a reasonable doubt that the injury in ...
Commonwealth v. St. Pierre, 11-P-654 (MACA)
“The Commonwealth also introduced photographs depicting the damage. Without objection, Detective Bourget estimated the damage.”
Commonwealth v. Santana, 11-P-830. (MACA)
“One Holyoke police officer authenticated eight photographs of the house.”
Commonwealth v. Lon, 09-P-1955 (MACA)
The judge ruled that the admission of gang evidence would be 'limited to areas where it is probative and relevant and [would be] excluded in other instances.' That ruling was correct. Gang related evidence that was embedded in the defendant's ...
Commonwealth v. Nunes, 10-P-1953 (MACA)
“He waived his Miranda and Rosario [rights and agreed to a video-recorded station house interview. The prosecution introduced the video into evidence and played it for the jury.”