Opinion
14-P-1210
05-27-2015
COMMONWEALTH v. ANTHONY BELL.
NOTICE: Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 (2009), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, such decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28 issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent. See Chace v. Curran, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 258, 260 n.4 (2008).
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
A jury found the defendant, Anthony Bell, guilty of witness intimidation, in violation of G. L. c. 268, § 13B. He argues on appeal that the evidence was insufficient for a rational trier of fact to find each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Our review of the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth convinces us that the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671, 676-677 (1979). Specifically, this case is controlled in all material respects by the holding in Commonwealth v. Cathy C, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 471 (2005).
Judgment affirmed.
By the Court (Cypher, Kafker & Green, JJ.),
The panelists are listed in order of seniority.
Clerk Entered: May 27, 2015.