Commonwealth v. Caldwell

94 Mass.App.Ct. 1117

122 N.E.3d 1100 (Table)

COMMONWEALTH

v.Richard A. CALDWELL

17-P-1420

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

Entered: January 17, 2019.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28

On appeal from his conviction of operating a motor vehicle after suspension of his license to operate, the defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We reverse.

Though the record is not entirely clear, the trial judge appears to have rested his finding of guilt on a certified record of the registry of motor vehicles, heavily redacted, which the judge initially interpreted to establish that the defendant's license was suspended on January 15, 2015, together with the absence of any indication his license had thereafter been reinstated. However, as the trial judge himself thereafter acknowledged, the registry record showed no such thing, and the judge's ruling was based on a misreading of it.²

The Commonwealth nonetheless contends that the evidence at trial was sufficient to establish that the defendant's license was suspended on August 17, 2016, and that the defendant received notice of that suspension before his citation, on August 20, 2016, for operating after suspension. On the topic of notice, the Commonwealth seeks to distinguish the present case from Commonwealth v. Oyewole, 470 Mass. 1015, 1016 (2014), on the ground that (unlike in Oyewole ) the defendant in the present case did not have his driver's license in his possession when he was stopped by Officer Chaulk. See and compare Commonwealth v. Wilson, 90 Mass. App....