Skip to main content
Rhode Island Judiciary Banner  
Supreme Court
Search
Rhode Island Judiciary > Courts > Supreme Court > Case Summaries > Criminal Case 2011  


CriminalCaseSummaries

 
Supreme Court

Criminal Case Summaries 2011

 

2011-353  State v. Brian Verry                                                          (full briefing)

 

Defendant Brian Verry appeals from a judgment of conviction on one count of felony assault, pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws § 11-5-2, for which he received a 20-year suspended sentence, with 20 years of probation; one count of simple assault, pursuant to § 11-5-3, for which he received a one-year sentence, to be served concurrently with the sentence on the third count; and one count of first-degree child abuse, pursuant to § 11-9-5.3(b)(1), for which he received a 20-year sentence, with 15 years to serve, and five years suspended, with five years of probation.  He contends that the trial justice erred:  (1) in denying his motion for continuance to further investigate a medical report, which defendant received on the eve of trial, regarding genetic testing conducted on both the victim and the defendant; (2) in denying the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal; and (3) in overruling defendant’s objection and motion to strike certain testimony of the physician.

 

2011-398  State v. Markus Matthews                                                 (full briefing)

 

The defendant appeals from a conviction for first degree robbery.  The defendant argues that double jeopardy was violated in allowing the jury to deliberate on two robbery counts for one robbery incident; the statement of Michael Long was erroneously admitted in violation of the confrontation clause; hearsay statements of Michael Long were erroneously admitted; and the trial judge erred in denying his motion for a new trial. 

 

 
2011-305  State v. Paul Fleck                                                            (full briefing)

 

The defendant appeals from a conviction after jury trial on one count of simple domestic assault charged pursuant to § 11-5-3 and § 12-29-5.  The defendant argues that the trial justice erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the state’s case, and in denying his motion for new trial, by finding that the defendant and the complaining witness were in a domestic relationship as “family or household members,” pursuant to § 12-29-2(b).        



 

2011-97   State v. Nayquan Gadson                                                       (show cause)

The defendant appeals from a conviction for second degree robbery.  The defendant contends that the trial judge erred in not dismissing the second degree robbery charge after the jury told the clerk that the defendant was not guilty of larceny.  The defendant also argues that the trial judge should have severed the firearms charges of his co-defendant.  In addition, the defendant argues that the trial judge erred in denying his motion in limine to exclude certain firearm evidence.



 


2011-190-C.A.           State v. Mark Ceppi                                             (full briefing)

 

The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for one count of domestic felony assault and one count of domestic simple assault.  The defendant contends that the trial judge erred in denying his motion to dismiss the two counts pursuant to Rule 9.1.  The defendant also argues that the trial judge erred in permitting two witnesses to testify on hearsay regarding the victim’s injuries.  He further argues that the trial judge erred in limiting the defendant’s cross-examination of the victim.  The defendant additionally argues that the state should not have been permitted to inquire about an incident involving the defendant and his former wife. 


2011-274-C.A. State v. Daniel Graca                                                   (full briefing)
The defendant appeals from the denial of his motion to expunge his record and from the denial of his motion to reconsider that decision.  The defendant asserts that the hearing justice erred in determining that the defendant was not eligible for expungement or to have his record sealed pursuant to § 12-19-19(c).



2011-355-A.   Michael Bell v. State                                                                      (full briefing)

 

The petitioner appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief.  The petitioner argues that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel.  He contends that his trial counsel provided erroneous advice about affirmative defenses that influenced him to proceed to trial.  He suggests that his trial counsel’s advice caused him not to consider a beneficial plea offer.

 .   


 

 
  
Rhode Island Judiciary 2011 Website Use Policy