Commonwealth v. Freeman
87 Mass. App. Ct. 448
| Mass. App. Ct. | 2015Background
- Detective Hussey, an experienced narcotics investigator, conducted surveillance in Cambridge near Cambridgeport/Central Square amid recent drug activity reports.
- He observed two men counting money on Magazine and Prince Streets; one was known to be a drug user; the other unknown.
- Those men walked to Fairmont Street; the unidentified man spoke on a cell phone while the defendant joined and talked with him.
- The two men stood on Fairmont Street; the unidentified man handed what appeared to be unfolded money to the defendant, who passed a small object to him.
- After the exchange, the men separated; the defendant counted money, the officer approached, identified himself, and the defendant dropped a cell phone and was arrested after a pat-down.
- A pouch containing eight folds of heroin and cash was found on the defendant; he made statements denying the meeting but admitting to having drugs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether probable cause supported arrest. | Freeman argues no probable cause from lone street exchange. | Freeman contends observations were insufficient for probable cause. | Probable cause found; reversed suppression order. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Santaliz, 413 Mass. 238 (1992) (factors for probable cause in drug transactions)
- Commonwealth v. Kennedy, 426 Mass. 703 (1998) (probable cause from observed exchange and context)
- Commonwealth v. Levy, 459 Mass. 1010 (2011) (drug activity context; observed events may elevate suspicion)
- Commonwealth v. Stewart, 469 Mass. 257 (2014) (probable cause assessment in drug transactions)
- Commonwealth v. Ellis, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 476 (1981) (earlier non-probable-cause examples)
- Commonwealth v. Clark, 65 Mass. App. Ct. 39 (2005) (exchange plus counting money insufficient for stop)
- Commonwealth v. Cheek, 413 Mass. 492 (1992) (context of area drug activity supports interpretation)