prima facie case standard (Massachusetts) · Go Syfert
← Massachusetts issues

prima facie case standard in Massachusetts

5 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1997–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Massachusetts courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Commonwealth v. Tuccerigreen
mass · 1992 · cited in 3 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 2005–2020
2 sentences

2020"To meet the prima facie case standard for discovery under a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, a defendant must make specific, not speculative or conclusory, allegations that the newly discovered evidence would have 'materially aided the defense against the pending charges,' Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401, 405 (1992), and that this evidence, if explored further through discovery, could yield evidence that might have 'played an important role in the jury's deliberations and conclusions, even though it is not certain that the evidence would have produced a verdic

2020"To meet the prima facie case standard for discovery under a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, a defendant must make specific, not speculative or conclusory, allegations that the newly discovered evidence would have 'materially aided the defense against the pending charges,' Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401, 405 (1992), and that this evidence, if explored further through discovery, could yield evidence that might have 'played an important role in the jury's deliberations and conclusions, even though it is not certain that the evidence would have produced a verdic

23
Abramian v. President & Fellows of Harvard Collegegreen
mass · 2000 · cited in 1 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
1 sentence

2000See Abramian v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, 432 Mass. 107, 116 (2000) (prima facie case analysis does not apply when there is direct evidence of discrimination).

11
Commonwealth v. Juddgreen
massappct · 1987 · cited in 1 Massachusetts opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
1 sentence

1997See Commonwealth v. Judd, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 921, 923 (1987).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Commonwealth v. Sealy green
mass · 2014
2 sentences

2020"To meet the prima facie case standard for discovery under a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, a defendant must make specific, not speculative or conclusory, allegations that the newly discovered evidence would have 'materially aided the defense against the pending charges,' Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401, 405 (1992), and that this evidence, if explored further through discovery, could yield evidence that might have 'played an important role in the jury's deliberations and conclusions, even though it is not certain that the evidence would have produced a verdic

2019In other words, "the defendant must make a sufficient showing that the discovery is reasonably likely to uncover evidence that might warrant granting a new trial." Sealy , supra at 629, 6 N.E.3d 1052 , quoting Daniels , supra .

22019–2020
Commonwealth v. Daniels green
mass · 2005
2 sentences

2020"To meet the prima facie case standard for discovery under a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, a defendant must make specific, not speculative or conclusory, allegations that the newly discovered evidence would have 'materially aided the defense against the pending charges,' Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401, 405 (1992), and that this evidence, if explored further through discovery, could yield evidence that might have 'played an important role in the jury's deliberations and conclusions, even though it is not certain that the evidence would have produced a verdic

2020"To meet the prima facie case standard for discovery under a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, a defendant must make specific, not speculative or conclusory, allegations that the newly discovered evidence would have 'materially aided the defense against the pending charges,' Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401, 405 (1992), and that this evidence, if explored further through discovery, could yield evidence that might have 'played an important role in the jury's deliberations and conclusions, even though it is not certain that the evidence would have produced a verdic

12020–2020

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MA § Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278, § 33E (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IN 134 (1911–2018) NY 77 (1915–2026) TX 40 (1926–2024) IL 25 (1982–2024) NC 13 (1906–2017) OH 13 (1958–2025) WA 12 (1913–2017) CA 11 (1914–2019) MI 10 (1962–2024) MO 9 (1901–2021) WI 9 (1910–2023) LA 8 (2001–2024) PA 7 (1973–2026) TN 6 (1965–2024) ND 6 (2013–2026) FL 6 (1992–2013) IA 5 (2012–2023) AL 5 (1977–2006) CO 5 (1957–2013) MA 5 (1997–2020) AZ 5 (1985–2022) NJ 4 (1998–2024) NM 4 (2017–2024) AR 4 (1993–2000) DC 3 (1987–2007) UT 3 (1989–2003) OR 3 (1954–2010) HI 2 (1939–2016) CT 2 (2001–2002) WY 2 (1978–2007) KY 2 (1922–2017)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check