Commonwealth v. Bartlett

Defendant was convicted of operating while under the influence of alcohol, fifth or subsequent offense, and possession of a class D substance greater than one ounce. Defendant appealed, arguing that the superior court erred in denying his pretrial motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a vehicle stop conducted by a Merrimac police officer in the neighboring city of Amesbury. At issue was whether the police officer acted unlawfully by carrying his authority outside his municipal boundaries. The Supreme Court affirmed the order denying Defendant's motion to suppress, holding that the stop was authorized under the terms of the mutual aid agreement between the municipalities, and that agreement complied with the requirements of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 40, 8G. View "Commonwealth v. Bartlett " on Justia Law