Opinion
No. 11–P–1227.
2012-11-7
COMMONWEALTH v. Alder ETIENE.
By the Court (KAFKER, COHEN & TRAINOR, JJ.).
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The defendant, Alder Etiene, was convicted of multiple drug offenses in 2006. This court upheld his convictions in 2008, and his motion for further appellate review was denied on September 8, 2008. In this appeal from the denial of his motion for a new trial, he argues that two drug certificates were improperly introduced at trial in violation of his Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution right to confrontation. Because the Supreme Judicial Court has determined that the rule announced in Melendez–Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009) (decided June 25, 2009), is not retroactive to convictions already made final at the time it was decided, we affirm. See Commonwealth v. Melendez–Diaz, 460 Mass. 238, 239–240 (2011).
Order denying motion for new trial affirmed.