Quantcast
Channel: Breaking News - MassLive.com: Westfield
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1269

Lawyers for Daniel Leary of Southwick, accused of motor vehicle homicide in death of David Laduzenski, want Breathalyzer test thrown out

$
0
0

There is a status conference n the case scheduled for Nov. 26.

LEARY.JPG Daniel Leary, of Southwick, is seen in Hampshire Superior Court during his March 2011 arraignment.

SPRINGFIELD – Defense lawyers for Daniel Leary, accused of motor vehicle homicide in the death of David Laduzenski, are asking the state Supreme Judicial Court to bar Leary’s Breathalyzer test results from being used at trial.

Leary, 36, is charged with motor vehicle homicide while under the influence of alcohol and possession of cocaine from the March 25, 2011, crash in West Springfield. He has been free awaiting trial after posting bail in the case.

Laduzenski, 29, of Somerville, grew up in West Springfield and was visiting his family over that weekend.

A status conference on the case against Leary is scheduled for Nov. 26. The trial date for Leary has been postponed several times.

Aaron W. Wilson, lawyer for Leary, of Southwick, told Hampden Superior Court Judge Richard J. Carey Monday he is seeking a review by a single justice of the state high court.

He hopes to reverse a different Hampden Superior Court judge’s recent ruling that the Breathalyzer test can be used by the prosecution at trial.

Laduzenski was in the driveway area of a friend’s house on Dewey Street at about 10:20 p.m. when he was struck by Leary, who had a blood alcohol level of .19, twice the legal limit, prosecutors have said.

Hampden Superior Court Judge C. Jeffrey Kinder on Oct. 29 issued a ruling denying Leary’s motion to suppress his breathalyzer results.

The defense argument was that the breathalyzer operator didn’t observe Leary for 15 minutes prior to the test being administered, as required by regulation.

Kinder said any defense attack on the breathalyzer procedure used by the West Springfield police is “fodder for cross-examination” by the defense but it doesn’t warrant excluding the results from the prosecution’s case.

Commonwealth v. Daniel Leary Memorandum of Decision and Order on Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1269

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>