Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Ortiz
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided February 12, 1996PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.
In Commonwealth v. Rosario, ante 48 (1996), released today, we considered whether confessions should have been suppressed because the police detained the arrested *65defendant for questioning, rather than taking him to court for arraignment. We prescribed a rule, in implementation of Mass. R. Crim. P. 7 (a) (1), as amended, 397 Mass. 1226 (1986), that allows the admission of all statements made during police questioning for a six-hour period following a defendant’s arrest, whether or not a court is in session, provided that the statements are otherwise admissible.
In this case, we also consider…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Commonwealth v. BradshawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Commonwealth v. SmallwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. ParhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- Commonwealth v. MartinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SannaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Commonwealth v. PORTER P.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010
- Commonwealth v. BelandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
- Commonwealth v. JohnstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Commonwealth v. ButlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.