Legal Opinion · Dissent

Powell v. Tompkins

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided April 15, 2015No. 13-1310Published

1Dissent

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge, Dissenting.

In my view, Powell is entitled to habeas based on his due process claim.

The SJC’s adjudication of that claim consisted of a reference to Commonwealth v. Jones, 372 Mass. 403, 361 N.E.2d 1308 (1977) to support the proposition that, because absence of a license13 is not “an *350element of the crime,” id. at 1311, the burden-shifting device created by Massachusetts General Laws chapter 278, section 7 accords with due process. Commonwealth v. Powell, 459 Mass. 572, 946 N.E.2d 114, 124 (2011), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1739, 182 L.Ed.2d 534 (2012). The task…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API