Commonwealth v. Santos, 122 N.E.3d 1098 (2019)

Citation: Commonwealth v. Santos, 122 N.E.3d 1098 (2019)
Parent Document: Commonwealth v. Santos, 122 N.E.3d 1098 (2019)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2019-01-02
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7178508/commonwealth-v-santos/ ↗

Full Text

959 chars

Even though the defendant failed to renew her motion for a required finding of not guilty, we still consider "whether the Commonwealth's position as to proof deteriorated after it closed its case" (quotation omitted). Commonwealth v. Alden, 93 Mass. App. Ct. 438, 445 (2018). The defendant put forth an expert witness, who testified to the defendant's medical history, including the symptoms of postconcussion syndrome. He also testified that the defendant's behavior on the day of the crash was consistent with someone who had suffered a head injury. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the defendant's expert contradicted but did not cause deterioration in the Commonwealth's case. See Commonwealth v. Ross, 92 Mass. App. Ct. 377, 381 (2017) (it is not enough for defendant to merely contradict Commonwealth's evidence). Accordingly, the evidence of negligent operation remained sufficient at the close of all the evidence.

Other Sections in This Document (19)

Full Text