Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Evidence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appeals court addresses prosecutorial concession in Carvallo harassment-order appeal
Summary
Defense counsel said the Commonwealth’s 16 L letter conceded insufficiency on the knowledge element of a harassment-prevention-order violation; the Commonwealth agreed that element likely fails and asked the court to consider vacatur or judgment, leaving other briefed issues preserved.
The appeals panel heard argument in Commonwealth v. Caleb Carvallo after defense counsel told the court the Commonwealth filed a 16 L letter conceding insufficiency on the element that the defendant had knowledge of the harassment-prevention-order's parameters. "As of yesterday, we received the 16 l letter essentially conceding that the Commonwealth did not meet their burden on the third element or knowledge," defense counsel Corey Arter said.
Commonwealth counsel Christopher Amoral confirmed the concession on the record and told the panel that the Commonwealth did not see a way around the record after review of controlling authorities. "So just to be clear, you ... are conceding that the evidence is insufficient and that the conviction should be vacated and case dismissed," a panel member summarized; the Commonwealth counsel said that was the likely position based on precedent.
Why it matters: A prosecutorial concession on an element during appeal can shorten an appeal and lead to dismissal or vacatur of the underlying conviction. The panel inquired about the defendant's custody status and whether additional preserved issues in the briefs should be addressed in the event the court declines to treat the concession as dispositive.
Next steps: Counsel rested on briefs; the panel took the matter under advisement.
