Commonwealth v. Olivier

5 Citing cases

  1. Commonwealth v. Jones

    478 Mass. 65 (Mass. 2017)   Cited 13 times

    Id. at 437, 862 N.E.2d 464. In Commonwealth v. Olivier, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 836, 845, 57 N.E.3d 1 (2016), the Appeals Court held that a defendant's argument that the records of the victim's appointment with her therapist after the alleged rape might contain "an inconsistent account or meaningful silence" was too speculative where there was "no evidence the victim ever even spoke to her counsellor about the alleged rape." Id. at 845-846, 57 N.E.3d 1. This was so even though the victim had been encouraged by her doctor to speak to the counsellor about the incident.

  2. Paradis v. Frost

    218 N.E.3d 664 (Mass. App. Ct. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    "[A] 504 plan is a plan to accommodate [a child's] disability and enable [him or her] to attend public school" (quotations and citation omitted). Commonwealth v. Olivier, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 836, 843 n.11, 57 N.E.3d 1 (2016). On May 30, 2018, Jacob's girlfriend interrupted a meeting between Frost and another student to report concerns she had about Jacob's well-being.

  3. Commonwealth v. Lavin

    101 Mass. App. Ct. 278 (Mass. App. Ct. 2022)   Cited 6 times

    First, the defendant must show misrepresentations or omissions "made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth." Commonwealth v. Olivier, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 836, 847, 57 N.E.3d 1 (2016), quoting Commonwealth v. Ramos, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 773, 777, 894 N.E.2d 611 (2008). "Second, the defendant must show that ‘the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause,’ ... or that the inclusion of the omitted information would have negated the magistrate's probable cause finding" (citation omitted).

  4. Commonwealth v. Lavin

    No. 18-P-1652 (Mass. App. Ct. Jun. 23, 2022)   Cited 1 times

    First, the defendant must show misrepresentations or omissions "made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth." Commonwealthv.Olivier, 89 Mass.App.Ct. 836, 847 (2016), quoting Commonwealthv.Ramos, 72 Mass.App.Ct. 773, 777 (2008). "Second, the defendant must show that 'the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause,' ... or that the inclusion of the omitted information would have negated the magistrate's probable cause finding" (citation omitted).

  5. Commonwealth v. Irwin

    119 N.E.3d 354 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018)

    This is precisely the type of speculative fishing expedition that our case law has held to be insufficient to meet the moving party's burden. See Jones, supra ("were we to accept the defendant's argument that the records would be relevant both because they might contain information regarding the alleged assault and because they might not, certain statutory and common-law privileges would be rendered meaningless"); Commonwealth v. Olivier, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 836, 846 (2016) ("even assuming that the primary care provider whose records the defendant sought would for some reason have information in her records about statements the victim made to her counsellor, there is no evidence the victim ever even spoke to her counsellor about the alleged [assault]"). In short, there was no evidence that the requested records existed, or, even if they did exist, that they would have borne on the victim's ability to perceive or recollect the attack.