Case Name: Commonwealth vs. Edward Wong
Court: Massachusetts Appeals Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1980-10-03
Citations: 10 Mass. App. Ct. 906
Docket Number: 
Parties: Commonwealth vs. Edward Wong.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports
Volume: 10
Pages: 906–906

Head Matter:
Commonwealth vs. Edward Wong.
October 3, 1980.
Thomas E. Finnerty (James F. McCormack with him) for the defendant.
M. Catherine Huddleson, Legal Assistant to the District Attorney (Stephen M. Needle, Assistant District Attorney, with her) for the Commonwealth.

Opinion:
This is a single issue case in which the defendant has claimed error in the alleged failure of the judge to instruct the jury that they must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had the specific intent to kidnap. There was no error.
The judge instructed the jury by quoting the material part of the kidnapping statute, G. L. c. 265, § 26, and by reading the language of the indictment, which uses the wording of the statute. The charge when read as a whole is not wanting in specificity as to the intent required for kidnapping. See Commonwealth v. Smith, 381 Mass. 141, 146 (1980). Contrast Commonwealth v. Ware, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 506, 509-510 (1977), S.C., 375 Mass. 118 (1978).
Judgments affirmed.