Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Lam

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 13, 2005PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C.J.

Before a single justice in the county court, the Commonwealth petitioned for relief pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, from the allowance by a judge in the District Court of a motion for issuance of certain summonses requested by the defendant pursuant to Mass. R. Crim R 17 (a) (2), 378 Mass. 885 (1979), in connection with charges pending against him for indecent assault and battery on a child. The defendant has asserted that the summonses are necessary to his defense, that the Commonwealth lacks standing to challenge the issuance of the summonses, and that the judge’s allowance of the motion was…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Pennsylvania v. RitchieSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Bowman Dairy Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  4. United States v. Alex J. RaineriCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
  5. Commonwealth v. BishopMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DwyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  2. Commonwealth v. PattonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010
  3. People v. SPYKSTRASupreme Court of Colorado · 2010
  4. State of Iowa v. Andrew Lee RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
  5. Commonwealth v. CarneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2010

10 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