Com. v. Otero

Decision Date30 October 1969
Citation252 N.E.2d 210,356 Mass. 724
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH v. Juan OTERO.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Henry P. Monaghan, Boston, for defendants, submitted a brief.

Alan Chapman, Asst. Dist. Atty., for the Commonwealth.

Before WILKINS, C.J., and SPALDING, CUTTER, KIRK, SPIEGEL and REARDON, JJ.

RESCRIPT.

At a trial for murder in the first degree the defendant was found guilty of murder in the second degree of Jesus M. Figueroa and sentenced accordingly. We have reviewed the whole case, mindful of our duty under G.L. c. 278, § 33E, as amended by St.1962, c. 453. The defendant concedes that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. The defendant's main contention on this appeal is that the judge's attitude toward defense counsel before, during and after trial was characterized by a personal antagonism which was so clearly manifested by critical comments, belittling rebukes and adverse rulings as to constitute a denial of a fair trial and the effective assistance of counsel and to require reversal. 1 A fair reading of the transcript, far from supporting the defendant's contention suggests that counsel should read, ponder, and perhaps profit from our observations in Commonwealth v. Lewis, 346 Mass. 373, 378--380, 191 N.E.2d 753, cert. den. sub nom. Lewis v. Massachusetts, 376 U.S. 933, 84 S.Ct. 704, 11 L.Ed.2d 653. There was no error or inadequacy in the portions of the judge's charge, original or supplemental, dealing with burden of proof, or the credibility of witnesses as affected by records of conviction. The method and extent of a charge to the jury are in the judge's discretion. Commonwealth v. Greenberg, 339 Mass. 557, 584--585, 160 N.E.2d 181; Commonwealth v. Monahan, 349 Mass. 139, 171, 207 N.E.2d 29. There was no error in denying the motion to inspect the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Com. v. De Christoforo
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 7 December 1971
    ...N.E.2d 901) or that the grand jury testimony might be in any other way inconsistent with Carr's testimony at trial. Commonwealth v. Otero, 356 Mass. 724, 252 N.E.2d 210. In these circumstances there was likewise no need shown for the trial judge to inspect the minutes in camera himself. Com......
  • Com. v. Rodriquez
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 6 August 1973
    ...necessary or desirable in the circumstances of the case seems a matter within the discretion of the trial judge. See Commonwealth v. Otero, 356 Mass. 724, 252 N.E.2d 210. (b) The jury retired to consider a verdict at 1:42 P.M., returned to the court room at 8:28 P.M. for a few moments to he......
  • Com. v. Cobb
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 9 January 1980
    ...---, --- g, 373 N.E.2d 1121 (1978). The method and extent of a charge to the jury are in the judge's discretion, Commonwealth v. Otero, 356 Mass. 724, 252 N.E.2d 210 (1969), and we conclude that there was no abuse of discretion in this case. Cobb argues further that he was prejudiced by the......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT