Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Amral

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 29, 1990PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

On February 5, 1987, the defendants, William J. Amral, Stephen G. Iwaniec, and Gordon L. Salisbury, were indicted for unlawful possession of a controlled substance. Amral and Salisbury were additionally charged with unlawful possession of hypodermic instruments. The indictments arose from a search conducted by officers of the Clinton police department pursuant to a search warrant on October 30, 1986. Each defendant moved to suppress the evidence seized during the search on the basis that there was no probable cause for the search warrant. The motion judge initially denied the motions to…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. United States v. CalandraSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. McCray v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MontanezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  2. Commonwealth v. MartinoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  3. Commonwealth v. DonahueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  4. Commonwealth v. StockhammerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  5. Commonwealth v. SnyderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992

54 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