Posts tagged "1102113"

Commonwealth v. Figueroa (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-021-13)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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;       11‑P‑833                                        Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  CARMEN FIGUEROA.     No. 11‑P‑833. Hampden.     July 13, 2012.  ‑  February 6, 2013. Present:  Grainger, Brown, & Sullivan, JJ.   Reckless endangerment of a child.  Practice, Criminal, Instructions to jury.  Evidence, Medical record, Prior misconduct.  Constitutional Law, Vagueness of statute.  Due Process of Law, Vagueness of statute.  Witness, Bias.       Indictment found and returned in the Superior Court Department on December 30, 2008.   The case was tried before C. Brian McDonald, J.     Mary H. Patryn for the defendant. Dianne M. Dillon, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.     BROWN, J.  After a joint trial in Superior Court, a jury convicted the defendant of reckless endangerment of a child in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 13L, and sentenced her to a two-year term of probation.[1]  On appeal, the defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain her conviction; (2) the jury instructions were flawed; (3) medical records admitted at trial improperly included prior bad act evidence; and (4) the statute under which she was convicted is unconstitutionally vague as applied to the circumstances of her case. At trial there was no dispute that the six month old victim suffered a complex skull fracture and multiple other injuries to his head and eyes as the result of physical abuse.  The charges against the defendant stem from her failure to obtain medical care for the victim (her grandson) after he was dropped on a tile floor and struck his head.  We summarize the evidence at trial in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, focusing on evidence relevant to the defendant’s attack on the sufficiency of the Commonwealth’s case and reserving certain details for our discussion. 1.  Background.  The victim and his twin brother were born on August 28, 2007, to the defendant’s daughter, Mary.[2]  Mary was fourteen years old when she became pregnant.  About six months before Mary gave birth, she returned to Chicopee from out-of-State to live with the defendant.  Also living in the home were the defendant’s boyfriend, the codefendant, Raphael Cruz; Mary’s younger brother; and Mary’s five year old niece.   When the twins were born, the defendant named one child Thad, and the codefendant named the other David.[3],[4]  The defendant made almost all of Mary’s decisions involving her life, including […]


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - February 6, 2013 at 5:33 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,