Posts tagged "Almele"

Commonwealth v. Almele (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-098-16)

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-11915

COMMONWEALTH  vs.  MARWAN M. ALMELE.

July 12, 2016.

Controlled Substances.  Evidence, Expert opinion.  Witness, Expert.  Practice, Criminal, Objection, Motion in limine, Striking of testimony.

A jury in the District Court convicted the defendant of possession of a class B controlled substance, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 34; and possession of class B and C controlled substances with intent to distribute, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, §§ 32A (a) and 32B (a), respectively.  The Appeals Court affirmed the convictions, see Commonwealth v. Almele, 87 Mass. App. Ct. 218 (2015), and we allowed the defendant’s application for further appellate review. read more

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - July 12, 2016 at 6:48 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,

Commonwealth v. Almele (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-031-15)

COMMONWEALTH vs. MARWAN M. ALMELE.

No. 13-P-1351.

APPEALS COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS

December 9, 2014, Argued
March 27, 2015, Decided

PRIOR-HISTORY: Bristol. Complaint received and sworn to in the New Bedford Division of the District Court Department on October 22, 2010. The case was tried before Christopher D. Welch, J.

HEADNOTES-1

Controlled SubstancesJoint EnterpriseEvidence, Joint enterprise, Expert opinion. Practice, Criminal, Objection, Motion in limine. Witness, Expert.

COUNSEL: Patrick A. Michaud for the defendant.

Shoshana E. Stern, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

JUDGES: Present: Cohen, Fecteau, & Massing, JJ.

OPINION BY: FECTEAU

OPINION

Fecteau, J. The defendant appeals from his convictions, following a jury trial in the District Court, of unlawful possession of class B and C controlled substances with intent to distribute, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, §§ 32A(a) and 32B(a), respectively, and possession of a class B controlled substance, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 34.1 He contends that the judge erred in permitting statements of a purported coventurer to be admitted against him without sufficient evidence, independent of those statements, of the existence of such a joint venture or conspiracy of which he was a part. He further contends that his motion for a required finding of not guilty was denied in error as evidence of his involvement as a joint venturer was insufficient. He also complains that opinion testimony from a police officer was erroneously admitted in evidence and that the officer impermissibly offered an opinion on the defendant’s guilt. As we are unpersuaded by these contentions, we affirm the convictions. read more

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - March 27, 2015 at 6:30 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,