green
Positive treatment
Trending · 123 recent citers
Quoted verbatim 4×
33.4 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 49 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez
first complaint testimony may be admitted for a limited purpose only, to assist the jury in determining whether to credit the complainant's testimony about the alleged sexual assault. the testimony may not be used to prove the truth of the allegations
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Moreno
some inconsistency ... is expected, and will often aid the jury
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Alvarez
the underlying purpose of first complaint evidence is still 'to counterbalance or address inaccurate assumptions regarding stereotypes about delayed reporting of a sexual assault or about sexual assault victims in general
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Pearson
first complaint testimony is not relevant and therefore not admissible under the doctrine where neither the fact of the sexual assault nor the complainant's consent is at issue, as in cases where the identity of the assailant is the only contested issue
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Santana
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 235 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (resolving "inconsistencies between the testimony" of various witnesses is "solely for the fact finder").
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Sam
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (repetition of sexual assault complaints "may unfairly enhance a complainant's credibility as well as prejudice the defendant by repeating for the jury the often horrific details of an alleged crime"); Commonwealth v. Trowbridge, 419 Mass. 750, 761 (1995) ("the repetition of fresh complaint testimony creates a risk that the jury will use the details of the fresh complaints as substantive evidence that the crime actually occurred").
cited
Cited "see"
COMMONWEALTH v. DOMINIC D., a Juvenile.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Luis Barbosa.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Nicholas P. Gousie.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 242-245 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Wilfrido Castillo.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Parnel Bogard.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 235 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Christian D. Barreto.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 242- 243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (describing first complaint doctrine).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Jeffrey S. Foley.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (holding that in sexual assault cases, the first person told about alleged sexual assault may testify about details and circumstances of initial complaint, but that no additional complaint witnesses may testify).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Gjeovanny Zorrilla.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Jose Melendez.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 242- 243 (2005), cert denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006). 5 disclose all exculpatory evidence in its possession, it is under no duty to gather evidence that may be potentially helpful to the defense").6 Judgments affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
COMMONWEALTH v. JAMES J., a Juvenile.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 242-243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
COMMONWEALTH v. CLAUDIANO SANTANA.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
COMMONWEALTH v. ARTHUR E. SALSBURY, JR. (No. 1).
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 239 n.20 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006), citing United States Department of Justice, First Response to Victims of Crime 2001, at 10 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
COMMONWEALTH v. GUSTAVO GONZALEZ SANTOS.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 238, 240 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006), quoting People v. Brown, 8 Cal. 4th 746, 759 (1994) (stating that "[t]he overwhelming body of current empirical studies, data, and other information establishes that it is not inherently 'natural' for the victim to confide in someone or to disclose, immediately following commission of the offense, that he or she was sexually assaulted," and rejecting "stereotypical assumptions to the effect that victims will immediately disclose a sexual assault and that the absence of a timely complaint suggests fabr…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Pena
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006); Mass. G.
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Ryder
See Commonwealth v. King , 445 Mass. 217 , 218-219 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Pineda-Mendoza
See Commonwealth v. King , 445 Mass. 217 , 242-243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Asenjo
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 242-243 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006). 8 The judge stated that “there has to be some quantum of admissible competent evidence of some history of psychological or physical abuse, that could support the opinion that [the defendant’s expert witness] would be offering.” The judge noted that he was not setting an “overly high threshold,” but insisted that there must be some admissible evidence, such as a witness who could testify to the abuse, to establish a foundation to support the defendant’s proposed expert witness testimony. 9 G…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Durand
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 245 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Daniel W. E.
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 242–44, 834 N.E.2d 1175 (2005) (adopting first complaint doctrine), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 , 126 S. Ct. 1433 , 164 L.
examined
Cited "see"
State v. Daniel W. E.
(3×)
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 242–48, 834 N.E.2d 1175 (2005) (replacing state’s existing fresh com- plaint doctrine with first complaint doctrine and permit- ting testimony by victim and third party regarding details of complaint as well as circumstances under which complaint was made), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 , 126 S. Ct. 1433 , 164 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Mayotte
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 240 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hobby Lobby Stores v. Sebelius
See O Centro, 546 U.S. at 1216 (noting that Congress, by way of RFRA, “adopt[ed] a statutory rule comparable to the constitutional rule rejected in Smith.”); Vill. of Bensenville v. Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius
See O Centro, 546 U.S. at 1216 (noting that Congress, by way of RFRA, “adopt[ed] a statutory rule comparable to the constitutional rule rejected in Smith.”); Vill. of Bensenville v. Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Suero
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 225 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006), and cases cited; Commonwealth v. Howze, supra at 153 (where criminal act of indecent assault and battery necessary to act of rape, “due process forbids separating the conduct into discrete units for prosecution”).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Scott
See Commonwealth v. Kirkpatrick, 423 Mass. 436, 447 , cert, denied, 519 U.S. 1015 (1996), overruled on other grounds, Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (1996).
examined
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Lawton
(3×)
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 225 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Hanino
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 237-249 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Morris
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 243 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (first complaint is most pertinent to jury’s assessment of victim’s motivation for coming forward and credibility); Commonwealth v. McCoy, 456 Mass. 838, 844-845 (2010). a.
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Roby
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 , 222 n.3 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (King) (elements of rape of child under sixteen by force are [1] sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse with [2] child under sixteen years of age [3] by force or threat of bodily injury and [4] against child’s will); Commonwealth v. Knap, 412 Mass. 712, 714 (1992) (elements of statutory rape are [1] sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse with [2] child under sixteen years of age).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Medina
See Com monwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 225 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Place
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 241-248 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Adams
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Porro
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 225 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. McNulty
(2×)
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 236 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Saunders
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 237-249 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. McGee
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 241-248 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Garcia
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 228-248 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Vick
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 225 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (convictions of greater and lesser included offenses “must rest on separate and distinct acts”); Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 405 Mass. 369,381-382 (1989) (conduct-based analysis appropriate where crimes charged are greater and lesser offenses); Commonwealth v. Gallant, supra at 413-416 (distinguishing Morey test from conduct-based analysis); Commonwealth v. Pileeki, 62 Mass. App. Ct. 505, 515-517 (2004) (Brown, J., concurring in result) (same); Commonwealth v. Howze, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 147 , 152-153 & n.7 (…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Ramos
See Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
COMMONWEALTH v. SCOTT McCAFFREY
See also Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 246 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (first complaint evidence limited to first complaint witness's "observations of the complainant during the complaint; the events or conversations that culminated in the complaint; the timing of the complaint; and other relevant conditions that might help a jury assess the veracity of the complainant's allegations or assess the specific defense theories as to why the complainant is making a false allegation"). "[W]here a complainant makes successive complaints to the first complaint witness, only the in…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
COMMONWEALTH v. IRVIN I., a juvenile.
Compare Commonwealth v. Vaughn, 23 Mass. App. Ct. 40, 42 (1986) (eyewitness testimony contradicted by evidence of defendant's incarceration at time of incident), with Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 236-237 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006) (victim's "hazy" memory relevant for jury's credibility assessment).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Colon
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. King , 445 Mass. 217 , 248, 834 N.E.2d 1175 (2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 , 126 S.Ct. 1433 , 164 L.Ed.2d 136 (2006) (prospectively applying new first complaint doctrine).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Jackson
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217, 227-228 (2005), cert, denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006).
Turner
v.
Anadarko Petroleum Corp.
v.
Anadarko Petroleum Corp.
No. 05-8238.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 27, 2006.
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.