Posts tagged "Tejeda"

Commonwealth v. Tejeda (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-061-17)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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   SJC-12187   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  JOSEFA TEJEDA.       Suffolk.     December 8, 2016. – April 20, 2017.   Present:  Gants, C.J., Lenk, Hines, Gaziano, Lowy, & Budd, JJ.     Misleading a Police Officer.       Complaint received and sworn to in the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department on October 8, 2014.   A motion to dismiss was heard by David Weingarten, J., and a motion for reconsideration was considered by him.   After review by the Appeals Court, the Supreme Judicial Court granted leave to obtain further appellate review.     Jason Shaffer (Robert E. Proctor & Colin Doyle also present) for the defendant. Zachary Hillman, Assistant District Attorney (Alexandra I. Halprin also present) for the Commonwealth.          BUDD, J.  This case presents an opportunity to further clarify the meaning of “misleads” in the context of G. L. c. 268, § 13B, specifically as it relates to nonverbal conduct.  Here, a complaint issued charging the defendant, Josefa Tejeda, with misleading a police officer after she picked up a small bag of what was believed to be heroin and swallowed it as the officer watched.[1]  A Boston Municipal Court judge dismissed the count.  The defendant sought further appellate review after the Appeals Court vacated the dismissal.  See Commonwealth v. Tejeda, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 625 (2016).  We affirm the order of the trial court judge, concluding that the defendant’s actions were not misleading within the meaning of the statute. Background.  We summarize the facts included in the application in support of the complaint against the defendant.  A police officer approached the defendant and a male whom the officer had observed earlier trying to purchase heroin with food stamps.  The two made eye contact with the officer and began to walk away.  A third person, a known heroin user, was squatting behind an automobile where the other two had been standing.  Concerned that the man behind the vehicle was concealing a needle in his hand, the officer ordered him to reveal what he was holding.  When the man refused, the officer grabbed his arm, causing a small plastic bag of a light brown powdery substance to fall from his hand to the ground.  As the officer began to take the man into custody, he simultaneously observed the defendant return to the scene, pick up the plastic bag […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - April 20, 2017 at 4:22 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,

Commonwealth v. Tejeda (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-074-16)

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; SJCReportersjc.state.ma.us   15-P-1085                                       Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  JOSEFA TEJEDA. No. 15-P-1085. Suffolk.     April 14, 2016. – June 24, 2016.   Present:  Kafker, C.J., Kinder, & Neyman, JJ. Misleading a Police Officer.  Probable Cause.  Practice, Criminal, Dismissal, Complaint.  Words, “Trick,” “Scheme,” “Device.”     Complaint received and sworn to in the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department on October 8, 2014.   A motion to dismiss was heard by David Weingarten, J., and a motion for reconsideration was considered by him.     Zachary Hillman, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. David S. Victorson (Lia C. Monahon with him) for the defendant.      KINDER, J.  The defendant was charged in the Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department with possession of heroin, see G. L. c. 94C, § 34, and misleading a police officer, see G. L. c. 268, § 13B.[1]  Prior to trial the defendant moved to dismiss both charges, arguing that the complaint application failed to establish probable cause.  The motion was denied as to the heroin charge, but allowed as to the charge of misleading a police officer; the Commonwealth appealed.[2]  This interlocutory appeal presents the question whether the concealment and destruction of evidence can mislead a police officer within the meaning of G. L. c. 268, § 13B.  On the facts presented here, we conclude that it can.  Accordingly, we vacate the order dismissing the charge of misleading a police officer. Background.  We summarize the facts set forth in the application in support of the complaint.  On October 8, 2014, Boston police Officer David Crabbe was on patrol near Roxbury and Washington Streets, an area of Boston known for open drug dealing.  His attention was drawn to a white male later identified as Christopher Willett.  Earlier in the day Officer Crabbe had observed Willett attempting to trade food stamps for drugs.  Officer Crabbe observed Willett walking briskly on Marvin Street toward Shawmut Avenue.  Willett was accompanied by the defendant, known to Officer Crabbe as “Josefa Tejada [sic].”  He lost sight of them briefly as he entered his cruiser to follow.  Officer Crabbe next observed Willett and the defendant on Madison Park Court behind a parked car.  They made eye contact with Officer Crabbe, turned, and began to walk away.  Officer Crabbe then observed a third individual squatting behind the car.  He recognized him as Jim Figueroa, known to Officer Crabbe as a heroin user.  Figueroa […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - June 24, 2016 at 5:53 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,

Commonwealth v. Tejeda (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-193-15)

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-11858   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  ROBINSON TEJEDA.       Suffolk.     September 10, 2015. – December 2, 2015.   Present:  Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ.     Homicide.  Felony-Murder Rule.  Joint Enterprise.  Robbery.  Home Invasion.  Practice, Criminal, Required finding, Motion for a required finding.       Indictments found and returned in the Superior Court Department on April 27, 2012.   The cases were tried before Janet L. Sanders, J., and a motion for a required finding of not guilty was heard by her.   The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review.     Dana Alan Curhan (Robert S. Sinsheimer with him) for the defendant. Vincent J. DeMore, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.     GANTS, C.J.  The primary issue in this appeal is whether a defendant who joins with others to commit an armed robbery may be found guilty of murder on the theory of felony-murder for the killing of his accomplice by someone resisting the armed robbery.  We conclude that he may not. Background.  We recite the facts in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, reserving certain details for our analysis of the issues raised on appeal.  On January 14, 2012, the defendant and two friends, Christopher Pichardo and Stephane Etienne, met with Frederick Reynoso, who was to sell them one-half pound of marijuana for $ 2,200.  Together, they traveled in a vehicle the defendant had borrowed from his girl friend to a residence in the Dorchester section of Boston, where the transaction was to take place.  Pichardo, Etienne, and Reynoso entered the home through a basement door; the defendant remained outside in the parked vehicle.  Reynoso’s cousin, Jonathan Santiago, was waiting for them in the basement.  Once inside, Santiago weighed the marijuana, placed it into eight one-ounce bags, and handed the bags to Pichardo.  Pichardo told Santiago that Etienne would pay him for the marijuana.  Etienne dropped his cellular telephone to distract Santiago, and Pichardo then pulled out a .40 caliber semiautomatic handgun from his waistband and told Santiago, “You know what time it is.”  Reynoso responded by pulling out his own .32 caliber revolver, and a gun battle between Pichardo and Reynoso followed in which shots were fired from both weapons.  A bullet struck Pichardo on the right side of his chest. Etienne and Pichardo attempted to […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - December 2, 2015 at 10:01 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,