Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Commonwealth v. Adjutant

824 N.E.2d 1 (2005)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...

Commonwealth v. Adjutant

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

824 N.E.2d 1 (2005)

Facts

Stephen Whiting hired an escort from Newbury Cosmopolitan International Escort Service (Newbury) for a full-body massage and one hour of company. Newbury sent Rhonda Adjutant (defendant) to Whiting’s apartment. Whiting paid Adjutant and then snorted cocaine. When Adjutant offered to start Whiting’s massage, Whiting insisted on sexual intercourse. Adjutant resisted and called Newbury. The Newbury dispatcher talked to Whiting, confirming that Whiting had not paid for intercourse. Whiting demanded a refund but was denied. At some point, Whiting had grabbed a crowbar, and Adjutant had grabbed a knife. Whiting used the crowbar to hit a counter and then Adjutant’s leg. Adjutant then nicked Whiting in the face with the knife. Two Newbury employees showed up, heard Adjutant screaming, and kicked down the door just as Whiting came after Adjutant with the crowbar again. Adjutant stabbed Whiting in the neck, killing him. Adjutant was charged with Whiting’s death. Adjutant claimed that she had acted in self-defense. While preparing for trial, Adjutant learned that Whiting had been violent on previous occasions, especially while intoxicated or under the influence of drugs, and that he had a reputation for being violent. Adjutant sought to introduce this evidence at trial to show that Whiting was the first aggressor. However, the trial court determined that evidence of a victim’s violent character was admissible only if the defendant knew about it at the time of the attack and if this knowledge helped explain the defendant’s fearfulness or force level. Because Adjutant did not know about Whiting’s violent tendencies until after the attack, the trial court excluded the evidence. Adjutant was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, and she appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Cordy, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 28,700 briefs - keyed to 983 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership