Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Monteiro

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 14, 2008PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The single justice’s decision, acting as a gatekeeper pursuant to G. L. c. 278, § 33E, is final and unreviewable. Commonwealth v. Scott, 437 Mass. 1008 (2002). Commonwealth v. Ambers, 397 Mass. 705, 710-711 (1986), and cases cited. Monteiro’s assertion that he could not have previously raised his ineffective assistance of counsel claim because his trial and appellate counsel were employed by the same agency, Commonwealth v. Egardo, 426 Mass. 48, 49-50 (1997), “ignores not only the nature of plenary review, see G. L. c. 278, § 33E, but also the single justice’s determination as gatekeeper that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. AmbersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  2. Commonwealth v. EgardoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
  3. Commonwealth v. HerbertMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  4. Commonwealth v. ScottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
  5. Commonwealth v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lee v. CorsiniCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
  2. Commonwealth v. CompanonioMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
  3. Monteiro v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API