Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Battle

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided December 4, 1973PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

The defendant has been convicted by a jury on separate indictments charging him with unlawful possession with intent to distribute (1) heroin and (2) a derivative of barbituric acid. The assignments of error (G. L. c. 278, § 33D) are addressed to the trial judge’s refusal to strike certain testimony and to suppress certain items of physical evidence obtained in the circumstances hereinafter described.

There was no pre-trial motion to suppress such as is contemplated and (in most cases) required by Rule 101B of the Superior Court (as amended effective June 1, 1971). The first day of trial was…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Abel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Hester v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  3. Commonwealth v. FancyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  4. United States v. Ralph F. DeleoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1970
  5. Commonwealth v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1963

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BattleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. LaniganMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
  3. Jarry v. CorsaroMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1996
  4. Gettens Electric Supply Co. v. W. R. C. Properties, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
  5. Commonwealth v. MonteririoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1976

4 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