Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Penrose
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided June 1, 1973PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBraucher, J.
By this appeal under G. L. c. 278, § § 33A-33G, the defendant asks us to rule that the val idity of his guilty pleas may be challenged by a motion for a new trial under G. L. c. 278, § 29, as amended through St. 1966, c. 301. The trial judge took a contrary view and denied such a motion. The defendant asserts, and we agree, that the remedy by motion is suitable for the purpose, and that such use of it is a logical application of the reasoning in Earl v. Commonwealth, 356 Mass. 181. Accordingly, we reverse the order denying a new trial and remand the case for hearing on the motion.-
In…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DascalakisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Blankenburg v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
- Earl v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
- Commonwealth v. VailesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971
- SHOPPERS'WORLD v. Board of Assessors of FraminghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HuotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. DeMarcoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Commonwealth v. FernandesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- Commonwealth v. LeventhalMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.