Com. v. Hesser
| Decision Date | 01 November 1973 |
| Citation | 1 Mass.App.Ct. 850,302 N.E.2d 927 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. Charles R. HESSER. |
| Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
Leonard Kopelman and Charles R. Hesser, Jr., Boston (Judith E. Soltz, Brookline, with them) for defendant.
David G. Eisenstadt, Asst. Dist. Atty., for the Commonwealth.
Before ROSE, KEVILLE and GOODMAN, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
This appeal under G.L. c. 278, § 28, brings to us nothing but the docket entries, which indicate that the defendant was fined five dollars for a 'parking violation.' The parking regulation involved is not contained in the record or even in the brief by agreement of the parties. See Commonwealth v. Berney, 353 Mass. 571, 572, 233 N.E.2d 739 (1968). The defendant's two-page brief asserts that his conviction 'is clearly contrary to the spirit, concept and tradition of Anglo-American constitutional law,' citing a North Carolina case concerned with off-street metered parking. The brief submitted in his behalf cannot be said to contain an argument as required by Rule 1:15(1)(d) of the Appeals Court Rules. Lolos v. Berlin, 338 Mass. 10, 13--14, 153 N.E.2d 636 (1958). We therefore do not feel called upon to deal further with this case. The brief is struck and the appeal, which borders on the impertinent, is dismissed.
So ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Hesser
...of the regulation are not before us (see Commonwealth v. Berney, 353 Mass. 571, 572, 233 N.E.2d 739 (1968); Commonwealth v. Hesser, Mass. App.Ct., 302 N.E.2d 927 (1973)), and there is no transcript of the evidence or of the proceedings in the Superior Court (see Guerin v. Commonwealth, 337 ......