Opinion
No. 16–P–159.
01-05-2017
COMMONWEALTH v. Patrice M. BROWN.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
After a jury-waived trial the defendant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license and with a suspended registration. The defendant argues on appeal, as she did in her pretrial motion in limine and at trial, that the documents from the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) supporting the charges should have been excluded because they violated her right to confrontation and did not qualify as business records.
Background. On May 1, 2014, the defendant, while operating her motor vehicle, was stopped by Cambridge police and issued a citation for operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license, operating a motor vehicle with a suspended registration, and operating an uninsured motor vehicle. Certified records from the RMV were introduced at trial that showed the defendant had been sent a notice as early as December 6, 2013, that her license to operate a motor vehicle would be suspended on January 2, 2014, and another notice on December 30, 2013, that her registration would be revoked on January 4, 2014. A certified copy of the defendant's driving record was also admitted in evidence. All of the notices were sent to a Langdon Street address.
The exhibit included the notices of suspension and revocation, a certificate of the registrar attesting to the accuracy of the notices, and United States Postal Service mailing confirmations created by the RMV at the time the notices were mailed.
The defendant testified and acknowledged receiving notices before she moved from her Langdon Street home, but she claimed they merely informed her that her license would not be renewed. The defendant also admitted that she knew she had an obligation to alert the RMV to any address change, but apparently failed to fulfill this obligation when she moved from Langdon Street to Bishop Allen Drive on November 6, 2013.
Discussion. The documents from the RMV attesting to the fact that the defendant's license and registration had been suspended were properly admitted in evidence as business records because this information is created and kept in the ordinary course of RMV affairs. Commonwealth v. Parenteau, 460 Mass. 1, 10 (2011). After the defendant's brief was filed in this case, we addressed the related issue whether the mailing confirmation could similarly be viewed as a properly admitted business record. Commonwealth v. Royal, 89 Mass.App.Ct. 168 (2016). We concluded, as was suggested in Parenteau, supra, that where mailing confirmation records are "created ... as part of the administration of [the registry's] regular business affairs," they too, are properly admitted as business records. Royal, supra at 174 (citation omitted). Just as the mailing confirmation was admissible in Royal, the contemporaneously created business record in this case, showing that notice was mailed on a particular date, is similarly admissible. To the extent the defendant challenges the actual date on which the notice was delivered to the post office on grounds that the notice contains the somewhat confusing notation, "received" by the post office rather than "delivered," it is of no import because "such cavils go to weight rather than admissibility." Id. at 174–175.
Finally, we agree with the Commonwealth that the RMV certificate that attests to the accuracy of the attached driving history and notices is not defective because it is dated after the complaint was issued. Such attestation is required for the admission of a business record at trial and, therefore, will not be produced until such time.
Properly certified driving history records showing the suspension of a defendant's license and registration are admissible in evidence as ordinary business records under G.L. c. 233, § 78, as well as pursuant to G.L. c. 233, § 76. See Royal, 89 Mass.App.Ct. at 173. See also G.L. c. 90, § 30 (admissibility of certified copies of registry records).
Judgments affirmed.