Commonwealth v. Jones-Pannell (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-059-14)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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       13‑P‑7                                          Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  OLAJUWAN JONES-PANNELL. No. 13‑P‑7. Suffolk.     November 8, 2013.  ‑  June 2, 2014. Present:  Katzmann, Grainger, & Sikora, JJ.     Constitutional Law, Stop and frisk, Reasonable suspicion.  Search and Seizure, Protective frisk, Reasonable suspicion, Threshold police inquiry.  Threshold Police Inquiry.  Practice, Criminal, Motion to suppress, Findings by judge.  Firearms.       Complaints received and sworn to in the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department on August 8 and 25, 2011.   After transfer to the Central Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department, a pretrial motion to suppress evidence was heard by Raymond G. Dougan, J.   An application for leave to prosecute an interlocutory appeal was allowed by Francis X. Spina, J., in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk, and the appeal was reported by him to the Appeals Court.     Cailin M. Campbell, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. John O. Mitchell for the defendant.     SIKORA, J.  Between midnight and 1:00 A.M. on August 6, 2011, two Boston police officers attempted to stop and question the defendant, Olajuwan Jones-Pannell, on Norfolk Street in the Roxbury section of Boston.  He fled.  One of the officers pursued on foot and overtook him.  As they grappled, a handgun containing seven rounds of ammunition fell from the defendant’s pants.  Complaints issued out of the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department charging the defendant (after subsequent amendment) with carrying a loaded firearm without a license, G. L. c. 269, § 10(n); carrying a firearm without a license, G. L. c. 269, § 10(a); possession of ammunition without a firearm identification card, G. L. c. 269, § 10(h)(1); and resisting arrest, G. L. c. 268, § 32B.  The defendant moved to suppress all evidence resulting from the encounter.  After an evidentiary hearing and legal argument by all counsel, the motion judge allowed the motion to suppress and ordered the entry of a memorandum of decision comprised of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Commonwealth sought leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal from the suppression order.  A single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court granted leave for an appeal to this court.  See G. L. c. 278, § 28E; Mass.R.Crim.P. 15(a)(2), as appearing in 422 Mass. 1501 (1996).  For the following reasons, we now reverse. Factual and procedural background.  1.  Testimonial evidence.  The sole witness at the suppression hearing was […]

Read more...