Com. v. Crutchfield
| Decision Date | 15 September 1978 |
| Citation | 380 N.E.2d 144,6 Mass.App.Ct. 923 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. Anthony CRUTCHFIELD. |
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
Daniel E. Callahan, III, Boston, for defendant.
Thomas J. Carey, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty. and Patricia A. Norton, Boston, for the Commonwealth.
Before HALE, C. J., and GOODMAN and GRANT, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
The defendant was not harmed by the exclusion of the question put to the witness Phillips (the defendant's sister) on direct examination as to the prior consistent statement which had supposedly been made to her by the witness Elmore; the jury heard Elmore's statement twice (in words virtually identical to those employed by the defendant's counsel in his offer of proof) during the course of the prosecutor's cross examination of Phillips. See Commonwealth v. Martin, --- Mass.App. --- a 374 N.E.2d 293 (1978). Indeed, the prosecutor extended an invitation to Phillips, which she accepted, to testify that she believed Elmore.
Judgments affirmed.
a. Mass.App.Ct.Adv.Sh. (1978) 207.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Patch
...grounds, Commonwealth v. Niziolek, --- Mass. ---, --- n.7 g, 404 N.E.2d 643 (1980). Commonwealth v. Crutchfield, 7 Mass.App. --- h, 380 N.E.2d 144 (1978). Judgment a. Mass.Adv.Sh. (1981) 605, 607-614.b. Mass.App.Ct.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1827.c. Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1143, 1155-1156.d. Mass.Adv.Sh. (......
- Com. v. Williams