Posts tagged "1100716"

Commonwealth v. Carvalho (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-007-16)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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   14-P-1675                                       Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  JOHN V. CARVALHO. No. 14-P-1675. Bristol.     October 6, 2015. – January 13, 2016.   Present:  Berry, Green, & Blake, JJ.     Intimidation of Witness.  Harassment Prevention.  Jury and Jurors.  Practice, Criminal, Challenge to jurors, Voir dire.       Complaints received and sworn to in the Fall River Division of the District Court Department on July 1, 2010, and March 30, 2011.   After transfer to the New Bedford Division of the District Court Department, the cases were tried before Robert A. Welsh, III, J.     Dana Alan Curhan for the defendant. Corey T. Mastin, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.     BERRY, J.  Following a District Court jury trial, the defendant was convicted on two counts of intimidation of a witness, G. L. c. 268, § 13B, and one count of violation of a harassment prevention order, G. L. c. 258E, § 9.  In this appeal, the defendant contends that the trial judge erred (1) in denying the defendant’s peremptory challenge of one prospective juror who was the only minority seated on the petit jury; and (2) in refusing to pose a specific question to prospective jurors as to their experience with restraining and harassment prevention orders.  The defendant also argues that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support the guilty verdicts on the two counts of witness intimidation against him.  We affirm. 1.  Background.  The jury could have found that the defendant and the victim, who rented an apartment from the defendant, had a series of hostile encounters that culminated in the victim obtaining a harassment prevention order against the defendant.[1]  Following the issuance of that order, the defendant confronted the victim and made comments to her about dropping it.  The defendant was charged with intimidating a witness and violating the harassment prevention order, and, as mentioned, he was found guilty by a jury in the District Court.[2]      2.  Jury issues.  We address two jury-related challenges posed by the defendant:  the peremptory challenge and the denial of a special question regarding experience with restraining and harassment prevention orders. a.  Peremptory challenge.  During jury empanelment, defense counsel exercised a peremptory challenge against juror no. 1, who was the only minority juror seated.[3]  The prosecutor noted for the record (but did not lodge a formal objection) that juror no. 1 was “the only minority juror.”  The […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - January 13, 2016 at 3:48 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,