Commonwealth v. Nelson
460 Mass. 564
Mass.2011Background
- Defendant convicted of possession of clonazepam and trazodone; possession with intent to distribute marijuana; and a drug violation near a school.
- Police obtained a search warrant for the defendant’s bedroom in the family apartment, located near a middle school; warrant issued after on-call judge approved via telephone/facsimile; Lima swore to the affidavit and was allegedly sworn over the phone.
- Drugs and paraphernalia were seized; the certificates of analysis identified clonazepam, trazodone, and marijuana but the chemical analyst did not testify.
- Mercer testified as an expert on distribution of marijuana; certificates were admitted and read to the jury by Lima; no analyst testified.
- On appeal, issues include suppression of the search warrant due to oath/personal appearance; constitutionality of the warrant procedure; admissibility of drug certificates without analyst testimony; and related evidentiary and prosecutorial-argument concerns.
- The Supreme Judicial Court reverses the convictions due to erroneous admission of drug certificates and remands for further suppression proceedings; the motion judge must determine whether Lima exhausted all reasonable efforts to appear before a judge before obtaining the warrant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrant was valid given oath and personal-appearance requirements | Lima did not appear personally before the warrant judge; oath may have been improper | Violation of art. 14 and G. L. c. 276, § 2B; search should be suppressed if not properly authorized | Remand for findings on whether officer exhausted reasonable efforts; potential suppression if not shown |
| Admission of drug certificates without testimony of analysts and confrontation concerns | Certificates identifying clonazepam, trazodone, and marijuana violated confrontation rights | Certificate admissions not harmless beyond reasonable doubt | Clonazepam conviction vacated; trazodone and marijuana convictions reversed; retrial possible on remand |
| Harmlessness of certificate admissions for trazodone and marijuana; impact on verdicts | Evidence supported by police testimony and expert Mercer | No independent verification of marijuana by expert; potential prejudice | Marijuana certification not harmless beyond reasonable doubt; overturns related convictions |
| Admissibility and handling of expert testimony and discovery issues | Mercer’s testimony should be scrutinized under Daubert-Lanigan; discovery provided | Cross-examination insufficient if methodology not properly vetted | No reversible error in discovery; Mercer’s opinion about possession with intent was improperly admitted but not controlling on retrial; to be addressed on remand |
| Prosecutor's opening and closing remarks regarding drug values and distribution | Statements about business like drug operation and $5,000 value were improper | Prejudicial highlighting of value without proper support | Not decisive given reversal on certificate issues; guidelines for retrial noted |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Monosson, 351 Mass. 327 (1966) (affidavit-based probable cause; on-point precedent for warrants and oaths)
- Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 Mass. 363 (1985) (probable cause and oath requirements; exclusionary rule considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Sheppard, 394 Mass. 381 (1985) (particularity and art. 14 considerations; tailored search warrants)
- Commonwealth v. Vasquez, 456 Mass. 350 (2010) (harmless-error standard for certificate admissions; strict burden on Commonwealth)
- Commonwealth v. Tyree, 455 Mass. 676 (2010) (guidance on harmlessness of drug-certificates evidence)
- Commonwealth v. MacDonald, 459 Mass. 148 (2011) (visual/experiential identification of marijuana; limits on certificate-derived proof)
- Commonwealth v. Connolly, 454 Mass. 808 (2009) (expert testimony interplay with police identification of drugs)
- Commonwealth v. Cromer, 365 Mass. 519 (1974) (ministerial error in warrant documents; effect on suppression)
- Commonwealth v. Ocasio, 434 Mass. 1 (2001) (warrant execution when no signed copy present; corroborating authority)
- Commonwealth v. Keefe, 7 Gray 332 (1856) (jad notations on jurat; authority for oath)