Commonwealth v. Brodsky

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Commonwealth v. Brodsky

400 N.E.2d 283, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 848

DecidedFebruary 20, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 400 N.E.2d 283 (Commonwealth v. Brodsky) 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. Brodsky, 400 N.E.2d 283, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 848 (Mass. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

There has been no showing on this record that the judge [849]*849abused his discretion or otherwise committed an error of law in excluding certain testimonial and documentary evidence pertaining to the victim. We need say only that even if the defendants could have (which we believe they have not) shown that the excluded evidence was “helpful and relevant to the issue on trial,” Commonwealth v. Shea, 323 Mass. 406, 417-418 (1948), the proffered evidence was properly excludable under G. L. c. 233, § 21B. Moreover, we can find no fault with the judge’s handling of this matter, as it was in full accord with the procedural mandate of the statute. There was no error.

Mitchell Benjoya for the defendants. M. Ashley Brown, Legal Assistant to the District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

Judgments affirmed

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

There has been no showing on this record that the judge [849]*849abused his discretion or otherwise committed an error of law in excluding certain testimonial and documentary evidence pertaining to the victim. We need say only that even if the defendants could have (which we believe they have not) shown that the excluded evidence was “helpful and relevant to the issue on trial,” Commonwealth v. Shea, 323 Mass. 406, 417-418 (1948), the proffered evidence was properly excludable under G. L. c. 233, § 21B. Moreover, we can find no fault with the judge’s handling of this matter, as it was in full accord with the procedural mandate of the statute. There was no error.

Mitchell Benjoya for the defendants. M. Ashley Brown, Legal Assistant to the District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

Judgments affirmed

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

400 N.E.2d 283, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-brodsky-massappct-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack