Commonwealth v. Daye

469 N.E.2d 483 (1984)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Commonwealth v. Daye

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
469 N.E.2d 483 (1984)

RW

Facts

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (plaintiff) prosecuted Dennis Daye (defendant) for shooting a man. Steven Ciambelli told the grand jury he recognized Daye as the shooter. At trial, Ciambelli denied recognizing Daye. The judge admitted Ciambelli's grand jury testimony as a past recollection recorded of Ciambelli's recognition of Daye as the shooter. Ciambelli repudiated his grand jury testimony. The jury convicted Daye. Daye appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, arguing the judge erred in admitting Ciambelli's grand jury testimony. The court ruled Ciambelli's repudiation of his grand jury testimony made that testimony inadmissible under the past recollection recorded rule and necessitated reversal, and proceeded to consider if Ciambelli's grand jury testimony could be admitted at Daye’s new trial as a prior inconsistent statement.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Abrams, 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 802,000 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 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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 802,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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