Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. LaFaille

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided July 8, 1999Published

1ConcurrenceIreland, J.

I agree with the majority that the record does not support the conclusion that the judge committed *56an abuse of discretion by refusing to conduct individual voir dire of the potential jurors. Therefore, I concur in the conclusion the court reaches today.

In reviewing a judge’s ruling for abuse of discretion, an appellate court is only to consider that which was before the judge when the ruling was made. As the majority notes, we cannot expect judges to be “clairvoyant” and predict what extraneous issues may arise as the trial unfolds.1 The Appeals Court considered trial testimony in reaching…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Aldridge v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Commonwealth v. FlebotteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  3. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  4. Commonwealth v. HobbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  5. Commonwealth v. SandersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981

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