Legal Opinion

In re Grand Jury Investigation

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 14, 2004PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.

In this case, we must decide whether a Superior Court judge properly denied motions to quash duces tecum summonses served on two minor children requiring them to testify against their father (father) before a grand jury. The judge stayed further grand jury proceedings to permit the children to seek relief pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, and to avoid a situation in which the children would refuse to testify, thereby making them subject to contempt proceedings. A single *21justice of this court concluded that review was appropriate, see Matter of a Grand Jury Subpoena, 430 Mass. 590, 592 n.5…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. BryanSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Blixt v. BlixtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
  4. Aime v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  5. Commonwealth v. KingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re a Grand Jury SubpoenaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  2. Chadwick v. Duxbury Public SchoolsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2016
  3. In re Grand Jury InvestigationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
  4. COMMONWEALTH v. RAJIV R., a JuvenileMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API