Intimidating a witness ma
An example of a "reckless assault and battery" is wildly swing your arms while you are near another person. The added element is that a person must "touch" another with an item or object used in a dangerous fashion, or that is in itself a "dangerous weapon," like a knife or a gun. The first hearing is "ex parte." This means that the person asking for protection appears alone and without notice to the other person.
Even if you did not mean to strike the person, you have committed an assault and battery if you do strike them accidentally and they are injured. An item "that is normally used for innocent purposes can become a dangerous weapon if it is intentionally used as a weapon in a dangerous or potentially dangerous fashion." Commonwealth v. This first, temporary order can be issued for up to ten days. To extend the order after a full hearing, the court must find a substantial likelihood of continued "abuse" upon a family or household member.
At the close of the Commonwealth's case, the trial judge denied the defendant's motion Page 426 for a required finding of not guilty on both charges, and the jury found him guilty of both. He further contends that while one may commit the crime of threatening by conveying a threat to a third-party intermediary with the intent that the threat will be communicated to the actual target, the evidence offered by the Commonwealth at trial was insufficient for a jury to find that the defendant intended that the alleged threat in the voicemail message reach the daughter. "The elements of threatening a crime include an expression Page 427 of intention to inflict a crime on another and an ability to do so in circumstances that would justify apprehension on the part of the recipient of the threat." Commonwealth v.
Accordingly, he asserts, the Commonwealth failed to provide the evidence necessary to support a conviction.
A second offense of domestic assault and battery is a felony, and can be punished by up to five years in state prison.
Most of us believe an assault and battery occurs by punching or violently striking a person. You can be guilty of assault and battery if you simply touch somebody, even slightly, if you had no right or legal excuse to touch the person and without that person's consent. Massachusetts' 209A law defines "abuse" as (a) attempting to cause or causing physical harm.
[426-429] At the trial of a criminal complaint charging threatening to commit a crime, in violation of G. [429-430] At the trial of a criminal complaint charging threatening to commit a crime, in violation of G. [430-431] This court concluded that the rule of lenity required reversal of a criminal defendant's conviction of violating G. [431-437] At the trial of a criminal complaint charging the defendant with threatening to commit a crime, in violation of G. [437-439] There was no merit to a criminal defendant's contention that a witness was improperly permitted to testify at his trial concerning the defendant's prior convictions in the absence of a certified copy of them, where the prior convictions were not intended to impeach a witness, but rather went to an element of the crime with which the defendant was charged, i.e., the issue whether he made a threat in circumstances that would justify apprehension. When the Legislature wishes to require an identity between the target of the threat and the target of the threatened crime, it knows how to accomplish this result. 265, § 43 (crime committed where person "willfully and maliciously engages in a knowing pattern of conduct . Because the Legislature has chosen, in § 2, not to specify that there be identity between the target of the threat and the target of the threatened crime in § 2, we interpret the statute accordingly, and conclude that they need not be the same person. 265, § 25, a statute defining the crime of attempted extortion. maliciously threatens to accuse another of a crime or offence, or .
275, § 2, the crime of threatening to commit a crime, the target of a threat and the target of the threatened crime need not be the same person. 275, § 2, the evidence was sufficient to permit a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant meant to express to a probation officer his intention to commit a crime against her daughter, that he had the ability to commit such a crime, and that the circumstances reasonably warranted apprehension on the part of the probation officer. 275, § 2, the judge's erroneous jury instruction, which in effect required the jury to find that the recipient of the threat was threatened with some type of harm or injury to herself distinct from the allegedly threatened crime against the person of her daughter, did not warrant reversal, where the extra burden imposed by the erroneous instruction fell to the Commonwealth. 268, § 13B, for intimidating a probation officer who had in the previous year recommended that the defendant's sentence be revoked and that he be committed to a sentence in a house of correction, where the meaning of the verbs "harm" and "punish" in the statute, as applied to a proceeding, was ambiguous. 275, § 2, in which the recipient of the threat was a probation officer, no substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice arose from the admission in evidence of the defendant's prior convictions or from the judge's limiting instructions regarding that evidence, where, given that the probation officer's entire knowledge of and relationship with the defendant arose from the fact that the defendant had committed criminal offenses before and had been placed on probation as a consequence, the officer's knowledge of the defendant's prior convictions could be deemed relevant to a determination whether her fear was indeed reasonable, and where the judge gave a specific clarifying instruction in response to a question from the jury, properly directing them to limit their use of the evidence to the probation officer's reasonable beliefs about the defendant's ability to carry out threats, not his propensity to commit crimes. [Note 6] By its terms, the language used in § 2 requires a threat (against Page 428 someone) of a crime (against the person or property of another), but does not state that the threat be issued against the intended crime victim. directed at a specific person which seriously alarms or annoys that person").
If you have been arrested for a domestic violence crime, you are likely being charged with one or more of the following offenses: Assault and Battery on a Family or Household Member (Mass. This means you can be punished by no more that two-and-one-half years in the house of correction.
A "family or household member" under this law is a (1) spouse or former spouse, a (2) person you have had a child with or (3) a person you have dated "substantively." A "substantive" dating relationship has no firm definition. Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon ("ABDW") (Mass. On or before the tenth day, the court must hold another hearing that gives the other party an opportunity to appear and demonstrate that there is no need for a 209A order.
It generally means a person you have have dated with some level of seriousness. To issue the first, temporary 209A abuse prevention order, the court must find that there is "a substantial likelihood of immediate danger of abuse." Mass.
Stalking and criminal harassment are very similar crimes in Massachusetts. A second offense carries a mandatory minimum sentence of two years in the ouse of correction or state prison. Our courts of appeal have interpreted parts of the law to include trying to prevent a person from contacting the police even if there is no criminal case in existence at the time.
You can be sentenced to five years in state prison if you are found guilty of a first offense. Massachusetts domestic violence prosecutions often include a charge of "intimidation of a witness" under section 13B of General Laws 268 that was intended to make it a crime to attempt to interfere with a pending or potential court case, whether criminal or civil.
Stalking is far more serious with graver punishment. While it is a misdemeanor, harassment carries a maximum two-and-one-half year penalty in the house of correction. A common scenario in these cases occurs when a domestic partner grabs the telephone from the victim during an argument, or makes a comment designed to convince the other not to contact the police. In 2014, as part of a larger domestic violence initiative, our legislature made this a specific crime.