Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Cunneen
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided May 16, 1983PublishedCited by 169 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHennessey, C.J.
The defendant, Arthur J. Cunneen, ap-
peals from his conviction of murder in the first degree.1 He raises three objections to the conduct of his trial. He says that it was error for the judge to deny the defendant’s motion for a mistrial when evidence was received which implied that the defendant had been involved in other crimes; that certain testimony as to chemical detergents was improperly admitted in evidence; and, finally, that the judge’s instructions to the jury did not adequately permit the jury’s consideration of the defendant’s mental retardation. We conclude that the defendant’s…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HofferMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Commonwealth v. CampbellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Commonwealth v. GouldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. RobertsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Commonwealth v. KostkaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by169 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Commonwealth v. DoucetteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- Commonwealth v. FreibergMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Commonwealth v. CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Commonwealth v. JamesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
164 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.