Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Phinney
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided March 6, 2006PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtIreland, J.
Pursuant to her gatekeeper function, G. L. c. 278, § 33E, a single justice of this court allowed the Commonwealth to appeal from an order of a Superior Court judge granting the defendant’s motion for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel. The Commonwealth argues that the motion judge erred because the defendant did not meet his burden to demonstrate counsel’s ineffective assistance where the third-party culprit evidence the defendant seeks to introduce at a new trial would largely be inadmissible and, in any event, would have made no difference in the outcome of the trial.…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SaferianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Commonwealth v. WrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Commonwealth v. GraceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Commonwealth v. BowdenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Commonwealth v. SatterfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Silva-SantiagoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
- Commonwealth v. AvilaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
- Commonwealth v. LaoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
- Commonwealth v. LintonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010
- Commonwealth v. MontezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.