Ramirez v. Commonwealth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtGants, C.J.
**331 We once again confront the question whether the absolute criminal prohibition of civilian possession of a stun gun, in violation of G. L. c. 140, § 131J, violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is applied to the States by its incorporation into the Fourteenth Amendment. In Commonwealth v. Caetano , 470 Mass. 774 , 26 N.E.3d 688 (2015) ( Caetano I ), we held that § 131J did not violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as interpreted by District ofColumbia v. Heller , 554 U.S. 570 , 128 S.Ct. 2783 , 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008). However, the United States…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- District of Columbia v. HellerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- McDonald v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican PartySupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- United States v. RainesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Avitabile v. BeachDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2019
- People v. WebbIllinois Supreme Court · 2019
- Commonwealth v. RaspberryMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2018
- People v. WebbIllinois Supreme Court · 2019
- Commonwealth v. Arickson CruzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2024
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.