Commonwealth v. Green (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-127-17)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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 16-P-396 Appeals Court COMMONWEALTH vs. DARRYL S. GREEN. No. 16-P-396. Barnstable. May 3, 2017. – September 27, 2017. Present: Green, Wolohojian, Massing, Shin, & Ditkoff, JJ. Larceny. Building. Evidence, Admissions and confessions, Corroborative evidence. Practice, Criminal, Admissions and confessions, Sentence. Indictment found and returned in the Superior Court Department on June 12, 2015. The case was heard by Robert C. Rufo, J. Eric W. Ruben for the defendant. Elizabeth A. Sweeney, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. DITKOFF, J. The defendant appeals after his conviction at a jury-waived trial of stealing in a building, G. L. c. 266, § 20, arising out of his theft of $ 240 from the home of his recently murdered neighbors. This case requires us to consider the nature of the corroboration required to support a conviction based on a defendant’s confession and to discern the dividing line between property stolen from a building and property stolen from the custody of a person in the building. Concluding that the confession was adequately corroborated and that the evidence made out the crime of stealing in a building, we affirm.[1] Background. Sometime between the evening of June 11, 2013, and the early morning of June 12, 2013, Crystal Perry and Kristofer Williams were murdered in their home in Falmouth by persons unknown. At approximately 1:30 A.M. on June 12, police found their bodies in the kitchen and living room, surrounded by blood. The front door had been forced open and “[t]he house . . . had been . . . ransacked,” but jewelry and a wallet remained in the house. The defendant was a neighbor of the victims and suffered from a heroin addiction. The defendant had been working as a mason’s assistant for approximately two and one-half years. His boss paid him in cash at the end of each day, and the defendant “never had cash the next day.” When the defendant’s boss picked up the defendant the morning of June 12, the defendant showed him cash and said, “Let’s go get this,” meaning that they should purchase heroin together. It was more money than the defendant had been paid the day before. The defendant and his boss then purchased $ 200 to $ 300 of heroin. The defendant’s boss also noticed that the defendant was wearing rubber boots […]
Green, petitioner
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-11999 JAMES GREEN, petitioner. Suffolk. March 10, 2016. – October 4, 2016. Present: Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ.1 Sex Offender. Evidence, Sex offender, Expert opinion. Practice, Civil, Sex offender, Instructions to jury. Petition filed in the Superior Court Department on August 11, 2011. The case was heard by Laurence D. Pierce, J., and a motion for a new trial was heard by him. The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review. Mary P. Murray for the Commonwealth. Michael A. Nam-Krane for the petitioner. Joseph M. Kenneally, for Committee for Public Counsel Services, amicus curiae, submitted a brief. HINES, J. This is an appeal from the denial of the Commonwealth’s motion for a new trial after a jury found the 1 Justices Spina, Cordy, and Duffly participated in the deliberation on this case prior to their retirements. 2 petitioner, James Green, no longer sexually dangerous in a proceeding brought pursuant to G. L. c. 123A, § 9. In the motion for a new trial, the Commonwealth challenged as erroneous and prejudicial the judge’s instruction that in order to find the petitioner sexually dangerous, the jury must credit the expert opinion testimony of the qualified examiner. The Commonwealth claims that the judge’s instruction was erroneous because it improperly commented on the weight a jury must give to a witness’s testimony and prejudicial because it precluded the jury’s full consideration of testimony by the community access board (CAB).2 We granted direct appellate review to clarify the reach of Johnstone, petitioner, 453 Mass. 544 (2009), where we interpreted G. L. c. 123A as creating a unique and central role for the qualified examiner3 in proceedings under the statute. 2 The community access board (CAB) reviews all records of a person adjudicated as a sexually dangerous person (SDP) and confined at the Massachusetts Treatment Center (treatment center) and reports those findings to the chief administrative officer of the treatment center. G. L. c. 123A, § 6A, second par. The CAB also conducts annual reviews of the current sexual dangerousness of each person held at the treatment center. Id. These reports are admissible in hearings involving persons adjudicated as sexually dangerous. Id. 3 A qualified examiner is either (1) a physician who is licensed by the Commonwealth and certified or eligible to be certified in psychiatry by the American […]
Categories: News Tags: Green, petitioner
Upcoming Boston GreenFest: Go Green, Save Money
This year's Boston GreenFest will take place on Boston City Hall Plaza on Thursday through Saturday, August 15-17, 2013. South End Patch News
City Testing Silly Putty, ‘Green’ Material to Fill Potholes This Spring
In an effort to “go green,” the city is testing three alternative pothole filling substances this spring: One, a silly-putty substance, two, a vegetable oil-based binder, and three, a 100 percent recyclable substance. “I expect our city to innovate constantly to better serve Bostonians” said Mayor Menino. “Potholes are a major menace to drivers. We are conducting this pilot test because we believe that these innovative solutions may offer longer-lasting, more environmentally friendly solutions than traditional pothole filling materials.” The city started a ramped up effort to target potholes last week. To date, nearly 1,000 potholes have been reported and filled since the campaign’s launch March 13, according to the city. Over the next six months, the city says they will be tracking these various substances to evaluate them for longevity of the fix, easy of use, envionrmental benefits, cost, and other parameters. New SubstancesThe three materials used in Boston this spring are called Hole Patch, Aquaphalt, and UPM. Hole Patch utilizes a silly putty like material in a Kevlar bag that is placed in potholes. Workers place the bag in the pothole to make it temporarily safe for drivers, with the idea that they will return when weather conditions improve to make a permanent repair. The second material, aquaphalt, is a more eco-friendly solution. It contains a vegetable oil based binder, which contains no VOCs (volatile organic compounds), a contributor to air pollution in Boston. Finally, UPM is designed to focus on longevity of the repair, and it’s UPM is 100% recyclable and contains well below all VOC and other Massachusetts regulation limits. Joanne Massaro, commissioner of Public Works in Boston, said the new substance trials show the city takes innovation seriously. “We always seek out ways to improve the services we deliver to Boston’s residents,” she said. “This pilot is a great opportunity to experiment with new solutions to make our roads smoother.” Residents can report potholes using the Citizens Connect app, calling the mayor’s hotline at 617-635-4500, filing a request online, or tweeting to @NotifyBoston with the hashtag #spotholes. Where do you see the biggest potholes in the South End? Tell us in the comments. SOUTH END PATCH: Facebook | Twitter | E-mail Updates South End Patch
TELL US: How Do You Go Green in the South End?
We’re looking for all the great ways South End residents are working to preserve and protect the Earth. From composting to creative recycling, we want to hear what you do to minimize your carbon footprint, reduce waste, and just live a greener lifestyle. Please tell us in the comments below or upload a picture! Here are some recent articles of ways others are going green: Boston Schools Implementing New Single Stream Recycling Program Boston Electronics Recycling Day Will Be March 23 Hubway Rides Replace 13 Percent of Car Trips in Boston Where are the South End’s Car Charging Stations? SOUTH END PATCH: Facebook | Twitter | E-mail Updates South End Patch