Legal Opinion
McDonough
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided August 11, 2010PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C.J.
A prospective witness for the Commonwealth in a criminal trial, the alleged victim Ruby McDonough, seeks interlocutory appellate review of an order of a District Court judge finding her not “competent” to testify because of her impaired capacity to communicate orally. McDonough’s disability is the result of a stroke, which causes her to suffer from “expressive aphasia.”1 Before trial, on motion of the defendant, McDonough’s “competency” was evaluated by a court-appointed expert. Focusing “primarily” on McDonough’s “intact mental capacity,” the expert opined that McDonough was competent to…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Linda R. S. v. Richard D.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- City of Boerne v. FloresSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Tennessee v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Reed v. Lepage Bakeries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Adjartey v. Cent. Div. of the Hous. Court DepartmentandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2019
- Commonwealth v. PughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
- H.T. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
- Dacey v. BurgessMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2023
- Vaks v. RyanMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2014