Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Commonwealth v. Leinbach
Citations: 29 Mass. App. Ct. 943; 558 N.E.2d 1003; 1990 Mass. App. LEXIS 486Docket: No. 89-P-1143
Court: Massachusetts Appeals Court; August 30, 1990; Massachusetts; State Appellate Court
Leinbach was convicted of trafficking in 200 or more grams of cocaine after selling to an undercover state trooper during a sting operation. On appeal, he contested the admission of hearsay evidence and evidence of prior drug dealing. 1. **Hearsay Claim**: A chemist’s certificate of analysis was admitted into evidence, confirming that the seized substance weighed 223.4 grams and contained 72% cocaine. Under Massachusetts law, this certificate served as prima facie evidence of the drug's composition and weight. The Commonwealth introduced additional testimony from Edward Gerraghty, a senior chemist who supervised the testing of the drugs. Gerraghty's testimony, based on the certificate and laboratory records (which were not themselves entered into evidence), described the testing procedures and findings. The court ruled that Gerraghty’s testimony did not constitute second-level hearsay and was appropriate to corroborate the chemist's certificate. 2. **Prior Bad Acts Evidence**: During the investigation, Leinbach made a statement to Detective Paul Barnicle indicating that the transaction was his largest drug deal, previously having dealt with three ounces. This statement was relevant to the quantity of drugs involved in the trafficking charge and indicated Leinbach's intent to sell. The trial judge had the discretion to weigh the probative value of this statement against potential prejudice to Leinbach. The court affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the admission of evidence.