Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Grant

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided April 27, 2000No. 98-P-1686PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPorada, J.

A jury in the Superior Court found the defendant guilty of murder in the second degree. Represented by new counsel on appeal, the defendant claims his conviction should be reversed because the judge’s instructions on voluntary manslaughter and provocation as requested by defendant’s trial counsel contained burden-placing language creating a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice. Because we decide that provocation was a live issue at trial and the incorrect burden-placing language was repeated on several occasions in conjunction with erroneous burden-shifting language, we conclude that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Commonwealth v. HaywoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
  3. Commonwealth v. TorresMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
  4. Commonwealth v. AcevedoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  5. Commonwealth v. NiemicMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ToonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
  2. Commonwealth v. LittleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  3. Commonwealth v. McLaughlinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
  4. Commonwealth v. FicklingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
  5. Commonwealth v. RodriguezMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003

11 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