Legal Opinion
Latimore v. Commonwealth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided May 16, 1994PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLynch, J.
In this case, we address whether Willie R. Latimore (defendant) may be awarded attorney’s fees and costs of appeal after a single justice, under G. L. c. 278, § 33E (1992 ed.), has denied the Commonwealth’s application for leave to appeal from a Superior Court judge’s order allowing the defendant’s motion for a new trial. After denying the Commonwealth’s application for leave to appeal, the single justice also denied the defendant’s request for attorney’s fees and costs. Because no statute or court rule exists authorizing the payment of such costs in these circumstances, we affirm.
1.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LatimoreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Dickerson v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
- Commonwealth v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Fuss v. Fuss (No. 1)Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Commonwealth v. FrancisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Simpson v. MatesanzCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999
- Commonwealth v. AugustineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015
- Commonwealth v. GonsalvesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
- Commonwealth v. PhinneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
- Commonwealth v. MurphyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.