Opinion
11-P-485
12-01-2011
COMMONWEALTH v. MICHAEL VAUGHN.
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 Commonwealth appeals from the portion of an order allowing the defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a police officer's answering a ringing cellular telephone. For the reasons stated in the judge's thoughtful and thorough memorandum of decision, so much of the order as allowed the motion to suppress is affirmed.
So ordered.
By the Court (Grasso, Smith & Meade, JJ.),