From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Morales

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.
Jun 13, 2012
968 N.E.2d 942 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012)

Opinion

No. 11–P–863.

2012-06-13

COMMONWEALTH v. Jose MORALES.


By the Court (KAFKER, BROWN & VUONO, JJ.).

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28

Upon review of the briefs, record appendix, and transcripts, we discern no missteps on the part of the trial judge that would cause us to reverse the defendant's convictions. Furthermore, while we acknowledge the Commonwealth's concession that the prosecutor's below-par closing argument was “inartful,” any toxicity created thereby was cured by the exemplary manner in which the trial judge acted in the circumstances. The trial judge, commendably, responded to the prosecutor's remarks by giving appropriate corrective instructions in a timely fashion—i.e., clear, contemporaneous, and specific curative instructions.

However, as an aside, the judge's performance does not excuse the prosecutor's “inartful” remarks, which appear to have been the product of lack of preparation and careful thought.

Judgments affirmed.




Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Morales

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.
Jun 13, 2012
968 N.E.2d 942 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012)
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Morales

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH v. Jose MORALES.

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

Date published: Jun 13, 2012

Citations

968 N.E.2d 942 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012)
81 Mass. App. Ct. 1142