Commonwealth v. Lewis (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-075-17)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-257 Appeals Court COMMONWEALTH vs. JEFFREY LEWIS. No. 16-P-257. Essex. December 12, 2016. – June 7, 2017. Present: Hanlon, Carhart, & Neyman, JJ.[1] Rape. Assault and Battery. Evidence, First complaint. Practice, Criminal, Instructions to jury. Indictments found and returned in the Superior Court Department on September 5, 2013. The cases were tried before Joshua I. Wall, J. James P. Vander Salm for the defendant. Catherine Langevin Semel, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. HANLON, J. After a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of four counts of rape, in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 22(b), and one count of assault and battery in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 13A.[2] He appeals, arguing that his convictions should be reversed because evidence was admitted improperly in violation of the first complaint doctrine. See Mass. G. Evid. § 413 (2017). This error, he argues, combined with what he describes as inadequate limiting instructions, resulted in prejudicial error. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Background. The jury could have found the following facts. In September, 2012, the victim met the defendant at a “club” in Lawrence; they had a “whirl wind romance really. He said all the right things, and [she] fell in love with him within a week.” A little more than a month into the relationship, however, things began to change. The defendant began to drink heavily, and, when he was drinking, he became rude and mean to the victim, as well as controlling — particularly in public.[3] The victim would sometimes not see the defendant for days at a time when he was drinking; he would “basically disappear” and she would “end up having to find him.” During this time, the victim was living in North Andover with her three children, and the defendant was living on a friend’s couch. Despite the defendant’s behavior when he was drinking, their relationship continued because, according to the victim, she was in love with him and he did not behave that way all the time. January 1, 2013, rape. By New Year’s Eve, 2012, the relationship between the victim and the defendant was “rocky,” but they had made plans to go out and celebrate that evening. The victim picked up the defendant from work at approximately 4:00 P.M. and left him at […]