Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Vaidulas

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 24, 2001PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpina, J.

The Commonwealth appealed from the postconviction order of a judge in the District Court for a required finding of not guilty. The order was entered after the judge determined posttrial a motion in fimine that he had taken under advisement before trial. Pursuant to the motion in fimine, the judge struck the testimony of a police officer who had arrested the defendant before the officer completed the training requirements set forth in G. L. c. 41, § 96B. On appeal, the Commonwealth argues *248that (1) the officer was exempt from the requirements of the statute at the time of the defendant’s…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Boston Edison Co. v. Boston Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
  3. Fowler v. BebeeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  4. Dobos v. DriscollMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  5. Commonwealth v. DiStasioMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. COMMONWEALTH v. JOAQUIN DIAZ.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2022
  2. Commonwealth v. SchutteMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
  3. Commonwealth v. CurtisMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
  4. Commonwealth v. MatteiMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2008
  5. Hutner v. Cape Codder Condominium Board of TrusteesMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001

2 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