Opinion
11-P-2079
12-17-2012
COMMONWEALTH v. THORNTON T., a juvenile. [FN1]
NOTICE: Decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28 are primarily addressed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, rule 1:28 decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28, issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The defendant appeals from his adjudication of delinquency alleging that there was insufficient evidence presented at the delinquency hearing to support the judge's finding of delinquency by reason of assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon. We affirm.
Background. At trial, it was alleged that the juvenile, with three others, had thrown rocks at a security guard for the Algonquin Heights housing complex. The security guard, Eric Logan, testified that he encountered the juvenile and three others sometime after midnight on August 7, 2010. The four young men were not residents of the housing complex. Logan asked them to 'move along.' They agreed, but approximately fifteen minutes later, Logan again encountered the young men. They were being loud and when asked, they would not give him their names. Logan instructed the young men to walk with him as he escorted them off the property. When they reached the edge of the property, Logan stopped and the four young men walked to an area on the edge of the property that was covered with landscaping stones. Logan saw all four young men reach down and pick up stones. In anticipation of their throwing the stones, Logan turned and started to jog away. He looked back toward the four individuals and was struck in the back of his legs. On cross-examination Logan testified that all four of the individuals had thrown rocks at him. In her findings, the judge ruled that there was sufficient evidence presented that warranted a finding that the juvenile was delinquent both as a principal and as a joint venturer. Discussion. When assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, we analyze the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth in order to determine whether sufficient evidence has been presented which would permit the fact finder to conclude that the essential elements of the crime have been proven. Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671, 677 (1979). In this case, the defendant argues that there was insufficient evidence presented that would justify the conclusion that the defendant acted either as a principal or as a joint venturer in the attack on Logan. This argument is without merit. The fact that Logan testified that he turned his back while the four young men threw rocks at him, does not lead to the conclusion that Logan did not see the defendant as he was participating with the others in the attack. The trial judge heard the evidence and, to the extent that there were contradictions in Logan's testimony, we are confident that the judge assessed any contradictory testimony and based her finding of delinquency upon the evidence presented at trial.
Adjudication of delinquency affirmed.
By the Court (Meade, Sikora & Carhart, JJ.),