Legal Opinion

Gagnon

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided July 8, 1997PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The petitioners, whose motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal was allowed, argue that their continued confinement at the Massachusetts Treatment Center violates their rights to equal protection and due process because the principles underlying their original commitments are “faulty” and the commitments are invalid. They also contend that our opinion in Commonwealth v. Tate, 424 Mass. 236 (1997), is not dispositive. We affirm the dismissal of the petition.

The petitioners contend that their State and Federal equal protection rights are violated because the repeal of portions of G. L.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Commonwealth v. TateMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Doe v. Sex Offender Registry BoardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2012
  2. Abdulla Ibn Yahya v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Superior Court · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API