Commonwealth v. Grady

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor (OUI), possession with intent to distribute a class B substance, and possession with intent to distribute a class B substance in a school zone. The Appeals Court affirmed. On appeal, the Commonwealth conceded that certain testimony was improperly admitted. Defendant, however, did not object to or move to strike the testimony. Defendant appealed, arguing that improperly admitted testimony violated his confrontation rights. The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding (1) under the circumstances of this case, Defendant did not properly preserve his appellate rights; and (2) the error did not create a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice. View "Commonwealth v. Grady" on Justia Law