Commonwealth v. Brann

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Commonwealth v. Brann

504 N.E.2d 356, 23 Mass. App. Ct. 980, 1987 Mass. App. LEXIS 1728

DecidedFebruary 27, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 504 N.E.2d 356 (Commonwealth v. Brann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Brann, 504 N.E.2d 356, 23 Mass. App. Ct. 980, 1987 Mass. App. LEXIS 1728 (Mass. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant was found guilty by a District Court judge of operating an uninsured motor vehicle (G. L. c. 90, § 34J). It was stipulated, among other facts, that at the time of the offense the defendant was a resident of Rhode Island and that her motor vehicle was registered in Rhode Island. Neither the defendant nor the owner of the motor vehicle had operated the vehicle in Massachusetts for more than 30 days in the aggregate in any one year.

The vehicle was exempt from Massachusetts insurance requirements under G. L. c. 90, § 3. See Jenkins v. North Shore Dye House, Inc., 277 Mass. 440, 443-444 (1931); Knapp v. Amero, 298 Mass. 517, 521-522 (1937); Van Dresser v. Firlings, 305 Mass. 51, 52 (1940); Knowles v. Cashman, 305 Mass. 56, 58 (1940); Malloy v. Newman, 310 Mass. 269, 271-272 (1941). Reciprocal privileges were granted by Rhode Island to Massachusetts motorists. See G. L. c. 90, § 3, first par.

The Commonwealth has filed a motion confessing error. The prosecutor deserves commendation. See Commonwealth v. Williams, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 915, 916 (1984).

Judgment reversed.

Finding set aside.

Judgment for the defendant.

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