Commonwealth v. Jordan, 125 N.E.3d 800 (2019)

Citation: Commonwealth v. Jordan, 125 N.E.3d 800 (2019)
Parent Document: Commonwealth v. Jordan, 125 N.E.3d 800 (2019)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2019-05-15
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7179122/commonwealth-v-jordan/ ↗

Full Text

924 chars

Statutory analysis begins with the plain language of the statute, "which we construe 'according to its common and approved usage.' " Commonwealth v. Sudler, 94 Mass. App. Ct. 150, 154 (2018), quoting Commonwealth v. Scott, 464 Mass. 355, 358 (2013). Where, as here, the language is unambiguous, the defendant's claim is unpersuasive. The evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth showed that the defendant slammed the bathroom door on the dog's head or face. He did so after being warned of the dog's presence. Furthermore, Officer Thomas initially saw the door "creep closed," but then, as Justice attempted to enter, the door "abruptly shut forward," and struck Justice on the side of the head. The manner in which the defendant closed the door, combined with all of the other evidence, supported the inference that he acted "willfully" to "strike" Justice within the meaning of G. L. c. 272, § 77A.4

Other Sections in This Document (24)

Full Text