Legal Opinion

Craig Benefit v. City of Cambridge

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 14, 1997PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.

General Laws c. 272, § 66, provides that “[pjersons wandering abroad and begging, or who go about from door to door or in public or private ways, areas to which the general public is invited, or in other places for the purpose of begging or to receive alms, and who are not licensed” may be imprisoned for up to six months. The plaintiff, Craig Benefit, filed a complaint on July 9, 1992, in the Superior Court seeking (1) a declaration under G. L. c. 231 A, that G. L. c. 272, § 66, is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and arts. 1 and 16…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Dombrowski v. PfisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. R. A. v. v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Baker v. City of Iowa CitySupreme Court of Iowa · 2008
  2. Commonwealth v. DislerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  3. Roe v. FarwellDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1998
  4. Commonwealth v. Weston W.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  5. Mendoza v. Licensing BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005

14 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