Opinion
11-P-478
05-01-2012
COMMONWEALTH v. HARSHIMA PIRES.
NOTICE: Decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28 are primarily addressed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, rule 1:28 decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28, issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The defendant was convicted by a District Court jury of a single count of assault and battery by throwing the victim to the floor and dragging, but was acquitted of assault and battery by choking her. On appeal, he contends that the conviction should be reversed because the judge erred in excluding evidence of (a) the victim's prior statement that she would rather see the defendant in jail than with another woman, and (b) her knowledge that victims of violent crime can receive financial benefits. These errors, he argues, improperly prevented him from presenting evidence of the victim's motive to lie, and were highly prejudicial since the sole issue for the jury to determine was the credibility of the victim.
Because the Commonwealth presented overwhelming evidence that the defendant assaulted the victim, the errors had little or no effect on the jury's decision. See Commonwealth v. Lodge, 431 Mass. 461, 468 (2000) (overwhelming evidence against defendant rendered error at trial nonprejudicial); Commonwealth v. Peruzzi, 15 Mass. App. Ct.437, 445-446 (1983). The victim testified that the defendant assaulted and beat her by throwing her to the floor and dragging her from one part of the residence to another. Her testimony was corroborated, in part, by Detective Landrigan, who responded to the victim's residence shortly after the incident. She testified that she observed what appeared to be a red rug burn on the victim's shoulder. In addition, the victim had small cuts inside her mouth and faint red marks on her neck. The jury was also presented with the victim's medical records documenting the existence of red marks on her left shoulder and the back of her left arm, as well as bruises on her neck.
Finally, the defendant testified at trial, admitted that he was with the victim at the time of the incident, and offered an implausible version of how the victim sustained her injuries, namely that the victim attempted to choke herself, then fell backwards while trying to prevent him from leaving the apartment. Given the strength of the Commonwealth's case, we are persuaded that the errors alleged had little, if any, effect on the jury.
Judgment affirmed.
By the Court (Cohen, Green & Graham, JJ.),