Powell v. Tompkins
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
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
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.