Commonwealth v. Garcia
82 Mass. App. Ct. 239
| Mass. App. Ct. | 2012Background
- On Oct. 12, 2006, Garcia was convicted by a jury of carrying a dangerous weapon and mayhem; appellant challenges sufficiency of evidence and jury instructions on §10(6) weapon possession, among other claims; convictions affirmed.
- Victim was stabbed in Ruggles Park by Garcia with a long blade concealed in a pimp cane; witness described the blade as eleven inches, capable of stabbing, with the assailant pursuing and stabbing the victim multiple times before fleeing in a car.
- The weapon was not on Garcia’s person at the time of arrest; the prosecution argued the weapon could be a dagger or dirk knife under §10(6), but did not prove folding blade characteristics for a dirk knife.
- Jailhouse recordings of Garcia’s pretrial statements were subpoenaed; the defense received copies before trial; Odgren later held such subpoenas require Rule 17(a)(2) judicial approval, but this occurred before that decision.
- The Commonwealth failed to obtain certain procedural approvals for the subpoena; the defense contends suppression was warranted, while Garcia contends the evidence was improperly admitted; other issues include missing witness instruction and effectiveness of counsel regarding suppression.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the weapon qualifies as a dagger under §10(6). | Garcia | Garcia | Yes, as a dagger; sufficient for §10(6) conviction. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for mayhem. | Commonwealth | Garcia | Sufficient evidence of serious injury to sustain mayhem. |
| Improper jury instruction on dangerous weapon elements for §10(6). | Commonwealth | Garcia | Error but not reversible given defense strategy and evidence. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel regarding suppression of jailhouse recordings. | Garcia | Garcia | No prejudice; Odgren issue arose after trial; not likely to change result. |
| Missing witness instruction - denial improper? | Commonwealth | Garcia | Not manifestly unreasonable; no missing witness instruction given. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 22 Mass. App. Ct. 694 (Mass. App. Ct. 1986) (dirk knife definition and dagger scope under §10(6))
- Commonwealth v. Va Meng Joe, 425 Mass. 99 (Mass. 1997) (sufficiency of evidence under §10(6) for daggers)
- Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671 (Mass. 1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Odgren, 455 Mass. 171 (Mass. 2009) (rule requiring Rule 17(a)(2) for third-party records; suppression factors)
- Commonwealth v. Lampron, 441 Mass. 265 (Mass. 2004) (pretrial evidence disclosure standards)
- Commonwealth v. Belcher, 446 Mass. 693 (Mass. 2006) (review of improper jury instructions for risk of miscarriage)
- Commonwealth v. Smith, 49 Mass. App. Ct. 827 (Mass. App. Ct. 2000) (missing witness instruction factors)
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 444 Mass. 102 (Mass. 2005) (standard for substantial miscarriage of justice)