Home/Massachusetts Appeals Court/Commonwealth v. Aparicio

Commonwealth v. Aparicio

440 N.E.2d 778, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 993, 1982 Mass. App. LEXIS 1456
Massachusetts Appeals Court·Decided October 4, 1982·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

The defendant contends that the cross-examination of the defendant by the prosecutor was improper and prejudicial. The defendant did not object at trial. After examining the transcript of this cross-examination, we conclude that there was no miscarriage of justice. Commonwealth v. Freeman, 352 Mass. 556, 563-564 (1967).

The judge was correct in denying the defendant’s motion for a required finding of not guilty. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, it was evident that the Commonwealth had satisfied its burden under Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671, 676-677 (1979).

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Commonwealth v. Aparicio, 440 N.E.2d 778, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 993, 1982 Mass. App. LEXIS 1456 (Mass. Ct. App. 1982).

440 N.E.2d 778 (Commonwealth v. Aparicio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Chase
877 N.E.2d 945 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2007)
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez
863 N.E.2d 958 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2007)
Commonwealth v. Peixoto
722 N.E.2d 470 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2000)
Commonwealth v. LaPerle
475 N.E.2d 81 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1985)
Commonwealth v. Murray
459 N.E.2d 123 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1984)
Commonwealth v. Buckley
458 N.E.2d 781 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1984)