Posts tagged "1102916"

Commonwealth v. Henderson (No. 1) (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-029-16)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-1459                                       Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  KEITH HENDERSON (NO. 1). No. 14-P-1459. Hampden.     October 5, 2015. – March 15, 2016.   Present:  Vuono, Carhart, & Sullivan, JJ. Motor Vehicle, Operation, Leaving scene of accident.  Evidence, Intent.  Intent.  Practice, Criminal, Instructions to jury, Duplicative convictions, Double jeopardy.  Constitutional Law, Double jeopardy.       Indictments found and returned in the Superior Court Department on April 9, 2013.   The case was tried before Edward J. McDonough, J.     Leslie H. Powers for the defendant. Alyson C. Yorlano, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.      SULLIVAN, J.  Following a trial on multiple indictments, a jury convicted the defendant, Keith Henderson, on two indictments charging leaving the scene of an accident causing personal injury in violation of G. L. c. 90, § 24(2)(a1/2)(1), and on three indictments charging leaving the scene of an accident causing property damage in violation of G. L. c. 90, § 24(2)(a).[1]  On appeal, the defendant maintains that (1) the judge erred in failing to instruct that the Commonwealth must prove that he had the specific intent to leave the scene of the accident, and (2) he was convicted of multiple counts of leaving the scene of an accident in violation of his right to be free from double jeopardy.[2]  We conclude that the jury were properly instructed, but that, on the facts presented, the convictions were duplicative.  We therefore vacate the judgment on one of the counts of leaving the scene of an accident causing personal injury and the judgments on all but one of the counts of leaving the scene of an accident causing property damage.  We affirm the remaining judgments. Background.  The evidence pertinent to the appeal may be summarized as follows.  Sean Kydd’s car was taken from him at gunpoint on March 5, 2013, by a man he was unable to identify.  Kydd filed a police report that day, reporting the car stolen.  Nine days later on March 14, 2013, Kydd spotted his car in Springfield and called the police.  Two police officers in marked police cruisers met Kydd, and all three drove separately to where the car was located. As the caravan passed Kydd’s stolen car, one police officer made eye contact with the driver, who was later identified as the defendant.  ”[T]he [car] took off” in the opposite direction.  The officers followed in pursuit.  The defendant “continued accelerating” and […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - March 15, 2016 at 4:10 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,