Commonwealth v. Crowley-Chester (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-041-17)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   SJC-12128   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  ATREYO CROWLEY-CHESTER.     March 9, 2017.     Constitutional Law, Search and seizure.  Search and Seizure, Motor vehicle, Impoundment of vehicle.     The defendant, Atreyo Crowley-Chester, was charged in a complaint with carrying a firearm without a license, in violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10 (a), and possession of a firearm or ammunition without a firearm identification card, in violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10 (h).  The charges stem from the recovery of a loaded firearm from a motor vehicle after police officers impounded and conducted an inventory search of the vehicle.  The defendant filed a motion to suppress, which a judge in the District Court allowed after an evidentiary hearing.  A single justice of this court granted the Commonwealth leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal, and the Appeals Court reversed.  See Commonwealth v. Crowley–Chester, 86 Mass. App. Ct. 804 (2015).  The case is now before this court on further appellate review.[1]  Because we conclude that the motion judge properly allowed the motion to suppress, we affirm.   Background.  At approximately 3 A.M. on March 15, 2011, Springfield police Officers Matthew Longo and Jose Canini were on routine patrol on Williams Street when they observed a Honda Accord automobile parked on the street in front of a vacant lot and across the street from a church.  The vehicle’s engine was running, and its lights were off.[2]  Using the police cruiser’s spotlight, Officer Longo observed two individuals seated in the front of the vehicle, both of whom appeared to be making furtive type movements.  The defendant was the front seat passenger.  The officers approached the vehicle and, after observing an unknown object in the defendant’s hand and a knife in the center console, ordered the driver out of the vehicle.  When the driver got out of the vehicle, a white rock-like substance fell to the ground.  Officer Longo recognized the object to be consistent with “crack” cocaine, and the driver was placed under arrest.  At this point, the defendant was also ordered out of the vehicle.  After the defendant got out of the vehicle, Officer Longo retrieved and secured the knife.[3]   The driver then asked that the defendant, who was not yet under arrest and who was free to leave the scene, be allowed to drive the vehicle.  Officer Longo determined, however, that the defendant did not […]

Read more...