Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Deeran

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided August 14, 1985PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

In his motion for postconviction relief, the defendant urges a substantial double jeopardy claim1 which has *589not been considered by any court on the merits. He also advances a less established, but nevertheless nontrivial, contention that he has never effectively waived that claim. See Commonwealth v. Clark, 379 Mass. 623, 626 (1980), & notes 2-4, infra. In 1976, a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court held that the defendant’s double jeopardy challenge was foreclosed. The defendant’s present motion for a new trial raises a nonfrivolous issue which requires review of that…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. United States v. DinitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Commonwealth v. DeeranMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API