Commonwealth v. Porter
This text of 350 N.E.2d 743 (Commonwealth v. Porter) 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.
Opinion
The judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for a mistrial following certain opening remarks by the prosecution. See Commonwealth v. Bellino, 320 Mass. 635, 644 (1947), cert. den. 330 U. S. 832 (1947); Commonwealth v. Hartford, 346 Mass. 482, 485-486 (1963); Commonwealth v. DeChristoforo, 360 Mass. 531, 536-538 (1971); Commonwealth v. Salemme, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 102, 105-106 (1975). Nor was there error in the judge’s denial of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, as there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could have found that the defendant participated in a joint enterprise with his codefendants and others to commit larceny from the policewoman. See Commonwealth v. Conroy, 333 Mass. 751, 755 (1956); Commonwealth v. Pina, 360 Mass. 139, 143 (1971); Commonwealth v. Manguda, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 785, 789, 792-793 (1975); Commonwealth v. Drew, ante, 30, 31-33 (1976).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
350 N.E.2d 743, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 828, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-porter-massappct-1976.