Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2026 2 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Saferiangreen2 sentences2018See Commonwealth v. Saferian , 366 Mass. 89 , 96 (1974). 2003Proceeding on that assumption, he reasoned that because the facts set out in the affidavits were not the same as the charged incidents of abuse, it was “far from clear that the ‘unused evidence’ would have been admissible at trial.” Consequently, he concluded that the defendant had failed to demonstrate that he was likely deprived of an otherwise available defense, see Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89, 96 (1974), or that his conviction gave rise to a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice. | 4 | 5 |
Commonwealth v. Berardigreen1 sentence2026See Commonwealth v. Berardi, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 466, 476 (2015), and cases cited. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Hillgreen1 sentence2012Applying these principles, the judge determined that “[defense counsel’s decision to not call an apparently credible and totally disinterested witness to act as counterweight to the Commonwealth’s sole eyewitness, and put in dispute the entire theory of the case that the defendant was the shooter, was manifestly unreasonable and deprived the defendant of an otherwise available defense.” See Commonwealth v. Hill, 432 Mass. 704, 717-719 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Delacruzgreen1 sentence2012Cf. Commonwealth v. Delacruz, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 445, 451-452 (2004), S.C., 443 Mass. 692 (2005). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Carrollgreen1 sentence2006Cf. Commonwealth v. Carroll, 439 Mass. 547, 553 (2003) (where excluded evidence was not relevant to any “live issue” at trial, .no abuse of discretion). b. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Cuttsgreen1 sentence2005It is not necessary to decide whether the defendant demonstrated a likelihood that his motion to suppress would have been successful, as was the case in Commonwealth v. Cutts, 444 Mass. 821, 830-831 (2005), and in Commonwealth v. Comita, supra. Here, the question is not whether the defendant was deprived of an otherwise available defense in the context of a trial, but rather whether the defendant’s ability to make an intelligent and knowing decision to plead was affected by not having the benefit of a decision on a viable motion to suppress. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Freemangreen1 sentence2003See Commonwealth v. Freeman, 352 Mass. 556, 564 (1967). 12 This conclusion also disposed of the claim against counsel on the defendant’s direct appeal. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Dayegreen1 sentence2001L. c. 278, § 33E, whether the defendant was deprived of an otherwise available defense had defense counsel argued instead that Murphy’s grand jury testimony should have been admissible for its probative value, under Commonwealth v. Daye, 393 Mass. 55, 65-72 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Florentinogreen1 sentence1995Commonwealth v. Florentino, 396 Mass. 689, 690 (1986). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Grace
green
1 sentence2023Mindful of the "special deference" due a motion judge who was also the trial judge, Grace, 397 Mass. at 307 , and concluding that the judge reached a reasonable decision after considering the relevant factors, L.L., 470 Mass. at 185 n.27, we reject the defendant's claim of an abuse of discretion. c. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
L.L., a juvenile v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2023Mindful of the "special deference" due a motion judge who was also the trial judge, Grace, 397 Mass. at 307 , and concluding that the judge reached a reasonable decision after considering the relevant factors, L.L., 470 Mass. at 185 n.27, we reject the defendant's claim of an abuse of discretion. c. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Morales
green
1 sentence2018Commonwealth v. Morales , 440 Mass. 536 , 549-550 (2003) (trial counsel not ineffective for failing to move for mistrial where request would have been futile). c. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Commonwealth v. Delacruz
green
1 sentence2012Cf. Commonwealth v. Delacruz, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 445, 451-452 (2004), S.C., 443 Mass. 692 (2005). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Commonwealth v. Comita
green
1 sentence2005It is not necessary to decide whether the defendant demonstrated a likelihood that his motion to suppress would have been successful, as was the case in Commonwealth v. Cutts, 444 Mass. 821, 830-831 (2005), and in Commonwealth v. Comita, supra. Here, the question is not whether the defendant was deprived of an otherwise available defense in the context of a trial, but rather whether the defendant’s ability to make an intelligent and knowing decision to plead was affected by not having the benefit of a decision on a viable motion to suppress. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Commonwealth v. Harbin
green
1 sentence2003Commonwealth v. Harbin, supra at 656 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.
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.