Court Case Record COMMONWEALTH vs. MARK SMITH 2010-P-1614


Court Case Number: 2010-P-1614

Case Number2010-P-1614
Case TypeCriminal
StateMassachusetts, MA
CourtNorfolk Superior Court
Court Address
Field Date02/28/2007
Close Date02/06/2012


Varsha Kukafka, A.D.A. Alexei Tymoczko, A.D.A.CommonwealthPlaintiff/Appellee
Peter M. Onek, Esquire Inactive Jane Larmon White, EsquireMark SmithDefendant/Appellant
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
09/16/2010 #1 Transcripts received: vols: 7; sets: 2 in Clerk's envelope.
09/16/2010 #2 Entered.
09/16/2010 #3 Notice of entry sent.
10/01/2010 #4 Notice of appearance of Jane Larmon White for Mark Smith.
10/26/2010 #5 MOTION to extend brief & appendix due date, filed by Mark Smith.
10/27/2010 #6 RE#3: Allowed to 01/31/2011. Notice to counsel.
02/09/2011 #7 MOTION to extend brief & appendix due date, filed by Mark Smith.
02/10/2011 #8 RE#4: Allowed for filing this date. Notice.
02/10/2011 #9 SERVICE of brief & appendix for Defendant/Appellant Mark Smith.
03/14/2011 #10 MOTION to extend brief due date of Commonwealth.
03/14/2011 #11 RE#6: Extension to 05/30/2011 granted for filing of brief of Commonwealth, Plaintiff/Appellee. *Notice to counsel.
04/27/2011 #12 Motion for inclusion in record of pages originally omitted in error in transcript provided to this court and the parties by Superior Court Clerk, with attached filed by Mark Smith.
04/27/2011 #13 RE#7 Allowed. The corrected pages of the transcript will be inserted into the copies of the transcript on file in the clerk's office. Notice.
05/18/2011 #14 SERVICE of brief for Plaintiff/Appellee Commonwealth.
06/06/2011 #15 SERVICE of reply brief for Defendant/Appellant Mark Smith.
07/20/2011 #16 Letter pursuant to MRAP 16(l) filed by Commonwealth.
09/19/2011 Notice of 10/17/2011, 9:30 AM argument at John Adams Courthouse, Courtroom 4 sent.
10/17/2011 Oral argument held.
10/17/2011 Letter pursuant to MRAP 16(l) filed by Mark Smith.*@
10/18/2011 ORDER: On October 17, 2011, following oral argument before this court, the defendant submitted a letter, purportedly pursuant to M.R.App.P. 16(l), requesting that a variety of citations (with parenthetical explanatory accompaniment) be inserted into his brief. See Mass. R.A.P. 16(l), as appearing in 386 Mass. 1247 (1982). The cited authorities were all available at the time the defendant filed his brief and reply brief; the submission following argument accordingly was an attempt at "reargument in the disguise of a supplementary citation" that rule 16(l ) "does not authorize." Commonwealth v. Siano, 52 Mass. App. Ct. 912, 913 n. 1, 755 N.E.2d 324 (2001), quoting from Reporters' Notes to Mass. R.A.P. 16(1), Mass. Ann. Laws Court Rules, Rules of Appellate Procedure, at 64 (Lexis 2000). See also Commissioner of Revenue v. Comcast Corp., 453 Mass. 293, 313 n.23 (2009). We do not consider those arguments. Id. To the extent the letter might be construed alternatively as a motion to amend the defendant's brief, it is denied(1). Notice footnotes (1) In addition to the fact that the proposed submission is outside the authority conferred by rule 16(l), we note that the insertion into the defendant's brief of the nearly four pages of citations and parenthetical explanations set forth in the defendant's letter would cause the brief to exceed by several pages the limit set forth in rule 16(h).
10/17/2011 Oral argument held. (Green, J., Katzmann, J., Hanlon, J.).
11/17/2011 Decision: Rule 1:28 Judgments affirmed (Green, Katzmann & Hanlon, JJ.). Notice.