Upton’s Case (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-127-13)
Investigatory interview about earnings discrepancies constitutes personnel action barring workers' compensation for resulting emotional disability.
Weekly
Commonwealth v. Gray (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-181-13)
Sobriety checkpoint case turning on whether Division Commander's Order 10-DFS-35 was part of the checkpoint's applicable guidelines, which determine if screening officer properly questioned defendant.
Adams v. Adams (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-182-13)
Superintendence review denied where interlocutory orders can be reviewed through ordinary appeal from final judgment; efficiency concerns insufficient to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction.
Commonwealth v. Liebenbow (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-126-13)
Defendant convicted of larceny for stealing metal from construction site. Whether honest but objectively unreasonable belief property was abandoned can negate specific intent to steal.
Commonwealth v. Halstrom (and seven companion cases) (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-125-13)
Affirmed convictions for inducing minors to prostitution and deriving support from prostitution. Evidence sufficient; jury instructions proper.
Alford, et al. v. Boston Zoning Commission, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-124-13)
IMP approval process is legislative, not quasi-judicial, so Article 29 protections do not apply. Affirmed.
Commonwealth v. Salyer (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-123-13)
Affirmed false report conviction; reversed and remanded criminal harassment conviction due to ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to privileged marital communications and insufficiently authenticated evidence.
Lawless v. Board of Registration in Pharmacy (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-180-13)
Board of Registration in Pharmacy properly entered default and revoked pharmacist's license after he failed to appear for scheduled hearing days.
Commonwealth v. Fortunato (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-179-13)
Statements made by arrested defendant more than six hours after arrest are inadmissible under Rosario rule when they result from police questioning, even if defendant initiates the conversation.
J.W. v. Department of Developmental Services, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-121-13)
Transfer statute requires administrative hearing to compare proposed placement with current residence, not to consider multiple alternatives beyond DDS's single proposal.