Com. v. Harris

5 Citing cases

  1. Commonwealth v. Crabill

    No. 23-P-864 (Mass. App. Ct. Sep. 10, 2024)

    Police may approach individuals on the street and ask them questions without implicating constitutional concerns, so long as the individual approached is free to decline to answer the questions. Commonwealth v. Harris, 93 Mass.App.Ct. 56, 60 (2018). Apaza's car was parked forty to fifty feet away, not blocking an exit, and his lights were not on.

  2. Commonwealth v. D.M.

    100 Mass. App. Ct. 211 (Mass. App. Ct. 2021)   Cited 4 times

    This was error given that those observations undisputedly took place after the stop was effectuated. See Commonwealth v. Harris, 93 Mass. App. Ct. 56, 61-62, 64, 96 N.E.3d 729 (2018) (where stop occurred prior to observation of knife, observation not to be considered in reasonable suspicion analysis). a. Reliability of the CI.

  3. Commonwealth v. Chin-Clarke

    97 Mass. App. Ct. 604 (Mass. App. Ct. 2020)   Cited 6 times

    Certainly, by the time McHugh asked the defendant for his identification, he had objectively communicated that he would use his police power to compel the defendant to stay. See Matta, supra at 365, 133 N.E.3d 258 (defendant seized "once the officer ordered him to stop, and then chased him"); Barros, supra (similar); Commonwealth v. Harris, 93 Mass. App. Ct. 56, 61, 96 N.E.3d 729 (2018) (defendant seized when "officers secured identification from each of [his] companions and began calling in that information"). The question then is whether, at the time of the seizure, McHugh had reasonable suspicion that the defendant "was committing, had committed, or was about to commit a crime."

  4. Commonwealth v. Soriano-Lara

    99 Mass. App. Ct. 525 (Mass. App. Ct. 2021)   Cited 4 times

    In Bartlett, questions about "where [the defendant] was coming from and where he was going" were held to constitute "investigatory conversation for which the officer had no lawful basis once he had received a valid license and registration."Id. at 469, 472, 671 N.E.2d 515. See Commonwealth v. Harris, 93 Mass.App.Ct. 56, 63, 96 N.E.3d 729 (2018) (noting that in Cordero, "police prolonged the stop by questioning the driver about his travel history that day"). The Commonwealth also asks us to consider the unreasonable-delay analysis in Commonwealth v. Martin, 91 Mass. App. Ct. 733, 81 N.E.3d 350 (2017).

  5. Commonwealth v. Noah N.

    96 Mass. App. Ct. 1114 (Mass. App. Ct. 2019)

    But police do not seize a person whenever they seek to question him. See Commonwealth v. Stoute, 422 Mass. 782, 789 (1996) ("not every encounter between a law enforcement official and a member of the public constitutes an intrusion of constitutional dimensions requiring justification"); Commonwealth v. Harris, 93 Mass. App. Ct. 56, 60 (2018). Rather, a person is seized under art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights if "an officer has, through words or conduct, objectively communicated that the officer would use his or her police power to coerce that person to stay."