Commonwealth v. Magadini

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of seven counts of criminal trespass. Before trial, Defendant requested a jury instruction on the defense of necessity, arguing that his conduct of being present in privately-owned buildings where he was the subject of no trespass orders, was justified as the only alternative for a homeless person to avoid exposure to the elements during periods of “extreme outdoor temperatures.” The judge denied the request. The Supreme Judicial Court vacated the first six convictions and remanded for a new trial, holding (1) the trial judge erred in denying Defendant’s request for an instruction on the defense of necessity as to the six charges related to the incidents from February through April 2014; but (2) the judge did not err in denying a necessity defense instruction as to the seventh conviction stemming from Defendant’s June 2014 trespass. View "Commonwealth v. Magadini" on Justia Law