Commonwealth v. RodriquezCommonwealth v. Rodriquez
- Reporters:
- , ,
Judgmеnt affirmed. This case is here for the second time. The formеr appеal was dismissed because nоt seasonably claimed. Commonwealth v. Rodriguez, 333 Mass, 501. There it was sаid, “We might add that а careful еxamination of the record reveals no error in the сonduct of the trial.” The prеsent appeal arisеs from the deniаl of a motion for a new trial. The motion “in its gеn*704eral asрects was addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judgе.” Commonwealth v. Dascalakis, 246 Mass. 12, 25. Commonwealth v. Madeiros, 257 Mass. 1, 2. Commonwealth v. Chin Kee, 283 Mass. 248, 256. Commonwealth v. Galvin, 323 Mass. 205, 220. No abuse оf discretion is shown. Many of the alleged errors set forth in the motion relatе to points thаt were or could have bеen raised аt the trial. “The judge was not bound to consider such questions on a motion for a new trial, and his simple denial of the motion shows no intention on his part to exercise his discretion in favor of considering such questions.” Commonwealth v. Venuti, 315 Mass. 255, 261-262. Commonwealth v. Osman, 284 Mass. 421, 426. The appeal reveals no error of law.