Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Panel weighs sufficiency challenge and whether detectives on-camera opinion was prejudicial
Summary
Appellant Philip Palmer argued the evidence tying him to a shooting was insufficient and that Detective Molinaris testimony that a handgun appeared to be placed in the defendants waistband amounted to an improper lay opinion; the Commonwealth said shell casings and video timing support a reasonable inference and that limiting instructions cured any risk. The case was submitted.
The appeals court heard argument in Commonwealth v. Philip Palmer on whether the trial evidence could sustain a conviction and whether an investigating officers descriptive testimony improperly intruded on the jurys fact-finding. Mary Miles, representing appellant Philip Palmer, argued the video evidence at most shows the defendant in the area and a deliberate adjustment of his waistband, which she said is equally consistent with…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
