Criminal Appeals

Attorney Erickson has prosecuted and defended in the range of fifty civil and criminal appeals. Examples of successful appeals include the following:

Case Name: Commonwealth v. J.
Court: Appeals Court
Type: Direct Appeal
Outcome: Judgments Reversed, Verdicts Set Aside; Judgment for the Defendant
Lead Charge: Trafficking in Cocaine
Summary: The defendant appealed the denial of motions for required findings of not guilty, failure to give a humane practice, flight, and/or expert witness charge, denial of a motion to suppress and ineffective assistance of counsel. The Appeals Court determined that it was error to deny the motion for a required finding on the trafficking count.

Case Name: Commonwealth v. E.
Court: Superior/Appeals Court
Type: Motion for New Trial/Direct Appeal/Motion to Revise and Revoke
Outcome: Motion to Revise and Revoke “to the Street” Allowed.
Lead Charge: Unlawful distribution of a controlled substance
Summary: The defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and was sentenced to five years, M.C.I., Concord. The appeal raised numerous issues the most compelling of which was the use over some objection of “profile testimony.” The defendant began a collateral attack against his counsel and asked the court to consider the direct appeal issues as well. The Court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion and following hearing allowed a motion to revise and revoke to the street. The defendant had just been denied parole. The defendant was released.

Case Name: Commonwealth v. B.
Court: Appeals Court
Type: Direct Appeal
Outcome: Judgment Reversed; Verdict Set Aside; Judgment for the Defendant
Lead Charge: Trafficking in Cocaine
Summary: The defendant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine. The appeal successfully argued that the opening of a cigarette flip top box violated the rule established in Commonwealth v. Bishop, 402 Mass. 449 (1988). The appeal also challenged a search of the car which the defendant was operating subsequent to an inventory search and the sufficiency of the evidence.

Case Name: Commonwealth v. J.
Court: Appeals Court
Type: Direct Appeal
Outcome: Reversed in Part, Affirmed in Part
Lead Charge: Motor Vehicle Homicide
Summary: The defendant was convicted of motor vehicle homicide, three counts of OUI causing serious bodily harm and various other offenses. He was sentenced to in total 41 to 45 years. The case raised constitution, procedural, and evidentiary issues. The appeal was successful in that the Appeals Court reversed two of the OUI serious bodily injury counts which in effect reduced the defendant’s sentence to 23 to 25 years. Sentence under the old law the defendant completed his sentence after serving under 12 years.