Commonwealth v. Spezzaro
| Decision Date | 08 January 1925 |
| Citation | 250 Mass. 454,146 N.E. 3 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. SPEZZARO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Middlesex County; J. H. Sisk, Judge.
Angelo Spezzaro was convicted of being accessory after fact to breaking and entering and larceny of cloth, and he excepts. Exceptions overruled.
A. K. Reading, Dist. Atty., and R. T. Bushnell, First Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Boston, for the Commonwealth.
Volpe, Zottoli & Perkins, of Boston, for defendant.
The defendant was charged with being an accessory after the fact to breaking and entering and the larceny of 52 rolls of cloth. He was tried jointly with one Del Grosso, who was convicted as principal.
[1] There was evidence that the shop of one Max Doctoroff, in Cambridge, was broken into and 58 rolls of cloth taken away between the hours of 2 and 30 minutes after 2 on the morning of July 28, 1923; that about 40 or 45 minutes after 2 o'clock on the same morning, a Packard automobile driven by Del Grosso and containing another man was seen by police officers in Merrimac Square, Boston, approaching from Cambridge and moving at the rate of 30 to 35 miles an hour; that the officers failed to stop the car, but followed it and in about 4 or 5 minutes came upon it in front of 124 Prince street; that 2 rolls of the cloth were found in the stairway at No. 124 Prince street, 10 rolls just inside the door, and 3 rolls at the top of the cellar stairs; that the Packard car was ‘filled from the floor up to about the door or a little past’; that Del Grosso, when the officers appeared, was in the doorway of the Prince street premisses, ‘without hat or coat’; and that he ran into the building and was finally captured.
There was evidence that when the Packard car was found on Prince street the defendant was standing near a Dort touring car, directly across the street from No. 124 Prince street; that he was asked who owned the Packard car, and he said he did not know, and also stated that he did not know who were the occupants of the car; that when Del Grosso was arrested, he admitted in the defendant's presence that he knew him, and the police officer then said to the defendant, ‘I thought you did not know this fellow,’ to which he answered, ‘Don't give me a cheap argument;’ that the defendant also denied knowledge of the ownership of the Packard automobile, or where it came from, but subsequently said it belonged to Del Grosso, and when shown the bill of sale for it to himself and Del Grosso as vendees, admitted that it was owned by both of them. There was evidence that the defendant said to one of the police officers that he had not seen Del Grosso ‘at any time that night.’ There was also evidence that, at one time, the defendant admitted he had seen Del Grosso on Charter street ‘about 6 o'clock that night and * * * didn't meet him after that until after the officers came to Prince street’; that the Dort car belonged to a friend of his, that he sat down in it and fell asleep, and when the Packard automobile stopped he left the Dort car; that he
There was evidence that ‘it was a nasty night and it had been raining’; that the Dort car was an open car; that the defendant and Del Grosso had often been seen together. There was no evidence that either the defendant or Del Grosso lived at 124 Prince street. The defendant testified that he sat down in the Dort car because he thought the Packard car would pass through Prince street on its way to the garage, about 150 feet distant from where the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Di Stasio
......Kaplan, 238 Mass. 250, 130 N.E. 485;Commonwealth v. Merrick, 255 Mass. 510, 152 N.E. 377;Commonwealth v. Donoghue, 266 Mass. 391, 165 N.E. 413. The false statements made by the defendant when questioned after the crime indicated a consciousness of guilt on his part. Commonwealth v. Spezzaro, 250 Mass. 454, 457, 146 N.E. 3;Commonwealth v. Desatnick, 262 Mass. 408, 414, 415, 160 N.E. 271;Commonwealth v. McCarthy, 272 Mass. 107, 111, 172 N.E. 97. These factors are not all explicable on the [8 N.E.2d 931] ground that the defendant was trying to save his father or to ......
-
Com. v. Bonomi
... . Page 140 . 140 N.E.2d 140 . 335 Mass. 327 . COMMONWEALTH . v. . Domenick L. BONOMI. . Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Plymouth. . Argued Oct. 1, 1956. . Decided Jan. 31, 1957. . ... Commonwealth v. Abbott, 130 Mass. 472, 473-474; Commonwealth v. Spezzaro, 250 Mass. 454, 457, 146 N.E. 3; Commonwealth v. Sokorelis, 254 Mass. 454, 457, 150 N.E. 197; Commonwealth v. Alba, 271 Mass. 333, 338, 171 N.E. 458. ......
-
Commonwealth v. Woods
...could have been found to indicate consciousness of guilt). See Montecalvo, 367 Mass. at 52, 323 N.E.2d 888;Commonwealth v. Spezzaro, 250 Mass. 454, 457, 146 N.E. 3 (1925). The defendant also falsely told police that the victim told the defendant to leave him in the parking lot and leave the......
-
Com. v. Montecalvo
.... Page 888. 323 N.E.2d 888. 367 Mass. 46. COMMONWEALTH. v. George Joseph MONTECALVO. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. Argued Nov. 5, 1974. Decided Feb. 21, 1975. Page 889. ...Trefethen, 157 Mass. 180, 199, 31 N.E. 961 (1892); Commonwealth v. Spezzaro, 250 Mass. 454, 4578 146 N.E. 3 (1925); Commonwealth v. Bonomi, supra; Commonwealth v. Curry, supra, or makes threats against key witnesses for the ......