12 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1996–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
New York v. Quarlesgreen2 sentences2018The judge further ruled that in any event, the Miranda requirement did not apply to either interview because both fell within the public safety exception, as articulated in New York v. Quarles , 467 U.S. 649 (1984) ( Quarles ). 2018In Quarles , 467 U.S. at 655 -657 , the United States Supreme Court recognized a public safety exception to the requirement that a suspect be advised of his Miranda rights before he is questioned. | 5 | 9 |
Commonwealth v. Alan A.green2 sentences2006I agree that, in light of New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 656-657 (1984), as interpreted by Commonwealth v. Alan A., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271 (1999), the public safety exception applies to the facts of this case, obviating the need for Miranda warnings when questioning is limited to ascertaining whether the gun is in a public place. 1 This exception does not, however, provide a basis to permit a warrantless search for the gun in the juvenile’s home. 2 Nor does it permit further questioning regarding the gun in the absence of Miranda warnings (and, where a juvenile is involved, a meaningful opp 2005The Commonwealth did not contend that the public safety exception to the Miranda requirement applied in this case, see New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984); Commonwealth v. Alan A., a juvenile, 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271 (1999), and the facts would probably not have supported such a claim. | 2 | 5 |
Commonwealth v. Meneusgreen2 sentences2022See, e.g., Meneus, 476 Mass. at 239 ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception based on this factor"); Gomes, supra at 1018 (no basis for stop where anonymous tip reported man holding gun in air in street; "[t]here is no 'firearm exception' to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the sole basis of an anonymous tip"); Commonwealth v. Barros, 435 Mass. 171, 172, 178 (2001) (no reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tip that man showed gun to others at intersection); Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 118-119 (2008) (no reasonable suspi 2020But see Meneus, supra ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception"). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Dillon D.green2 sentences2019Finally, it is true, as the Commonwealth argues, that the public safety exception allows police to ask "suspects questions dedicated to locating [ ] missing weapons without being required to give Miranda warnings," Commonwealth v. Guthrie G ., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414 , 417 (2006), in circumstances where concern for public safety is paramount, Commonwealth v. Dillon D ., 448 Mass. 793 , 796 (2007). 2009See New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 656-657 (1984); Commonwealth v. Clark, 432 Mass. at 13-14 ; Commonwealth v. Dillon D., 448 Mass. 793, 796 (2007); Commonwealth v. Alan A., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271, 274-275 (1999); Commonwealth v. Guthrie G., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414, 416 (2006), S.C., 449 Mass. 1028 (2007). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Guthrie G.green2 sentences2019Finally, it is true, as the Commonwealth argues, that the public safety exception allows police to ask "suspects questions dedicated to locating [ ] missing weapons without being required to give Miranda warnings," Commonwealth v. Guthrie G ., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414 , 417 (2006), in circumstances where concern for public safety is paramount, Commonwealth v. Dillon D ., 448 Mass. 793 , 796 (2007). 2009See New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 656-657 (1984); Commonwealth v. Clark, 432 Mass. at 13-14 ; Commonwealth v. Dillon D., 448 Mass. 793, 796 (2007); Commonwealth v. Alan A., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271, 274-275 (1999); Commonwealth v. Guthrie G., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414, 416 (2006), S.C., 449 Mass. 1028 (2007). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Washingtongreen1 sentence2025However, "[w]e may affirm the denial of a motion to suppress on any ground supported by the record." Commonwealth v. Washington, 449 Mass. 476, 483 (2007). 6 quoting New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 659 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Barrosgreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., Meneus, 476 Mass. at 239 ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception based on this factor"); Gomes, supra at 1018 (no basis for stop where anonymous tip reported man holding gun in air in street; "[t]here is no 'firearm exception' to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the sole basis of an anonymous tip"); Commonwealth v. Barros, 435 Mass. 171, 172, 178 (2001) (no reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tip that man showed gun to others at intersection); Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 118-119 (2008) (no reasonable suspi | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Vinton V.green1 sentence2022See, e.g., Meneus, 476 Mass. at 239 ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception based on this factor"); Gomes, supra at 1018 (no basis for stop where anonymous tip reported man holding gun in air in street; "[t]here is no 'firearm exception' to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the sole basis of an anonymous tip"); Commonwealth v. Barros, 435 Mass. 171, 172, 178 (2001) (no reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tip that man showed gun to others at intersection); Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 118-119 (2008) (no reasonable suspi | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. DeJesusgreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., Meneus, 476 Mass. at 239 ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception based on this factor"); Gomes, supra at 1018 (no basis for stop where anonymous tip reported man holding gun in air in street; "[t]here is no 'firearm exception' to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the sole basis of an anonymous tip"); Commonwealth v. Barros, 435 Mass. 171, 172, 178 (2001) (no reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tip that man showed gun to others at intersection); Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 118-119 (2008) (no reasonable suspi | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Dagracagreen1 sentence2017Even if we assume, without deciding, that it was constitutional error to admit the defendant's postinvocation statements and the evidence about the ensuing, but fruitless, police search for the gun, any such error would not require reversal in this case. 13 Where the Commonwealth introduces evidence in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights, "we examine the case to determine whether the erroneous admission was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." Commonwealth v. Dagraca, 447 Mass. 546, 552 (2006). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Rogersgreen1 sentence2006Commonwealth v. Rogers, 444 Mass. 234, 241 (2005). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Meneusgreen2 sentences2022See, e.g., Meneus, 476 Mass. at 239 ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception based on this factor"); Gomes, supra at 1018 (no basis for stop where anonymous tip reported man holding gun in air in street; "[t]here is no 'firearm exception' to the general rule barring investigatory stops and frisks on the sole basis of an anonymous tip"); Commonwealth v. Barros, 435 Mass. 171, 172, 178 (2001) (no reasonable suspicion based on anonymous tip that man showed gun to others at intersection); Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 72 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 118-119 (2008) (no reasonable suspi 2020But see Meneus, supra ("we have not gone so far as to carve out a public safety exception"). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Clark
green
2 sentences2009See New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 656-657 (1984); Commonwealth v. Clark, 432 Mass. at 13-14 ; Commonwealth v. Dillon D., 448 Mass. 793, 796 (2007); Commonwealth v. Alan A., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271, 274-275 (1999); Commonwealth v. Guthrie G., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414, 416 (2006), S.C., 449 Mass. 1028 (2007). 2007Commonwealth v. Clark, supra. Here, Partello was faced with an emergency situation that required protecting approximately 890 children at the middle school and residents of the neighborhood. | 2 | 2007–2009 |
Commonwealth v. Loadholt
green
1 sentence2025The court held that the public safety exception applied, noting, among other factors, that the live round of ammunition suggested an immediate threat to the officers and other occupants of the apartment, and that "the entire apartment had not yet been 7 cleared, so the officers did not know if other individuals were present." Id. at 419 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Commonwealth v. Guthrie G.
green
1 sentence2009See New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 656-657 (1984); Commonwealth v. Clark, 432 Mass. at 13-14 ; Commonwealth v. Dillon D., 448 Mass. 793, 796 (2007); Commonwealth v. Alan A., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 271, 274-275 (1999); Commonwealth v. Guthrie G., 66 Mass. App. Ct. 414, 416 (2006), S.C., 449 Mass. 1028 (2007). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Commonwealth v. MacNeill
green
1 sentence2007Commonwealth v. MacNeill, supra. However, the United States Supreme Court has held that a public safety exception to the general rule applies if there are circumstances in which “concern for public safety [is] paramount to adherence to the literal language of the prophylactic rules enunciated in Miranda.” New York v. Quarles, supra at 653 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Commonwealth v. Martin
green
2 sentences2006In Commonwealth v. Martin, 444 Mass. 213 , 217 n.2 (2005), the Supreme Judicial Court rejected, in dicta, the application of the public safety exception to permit a warrantless search of the defendant’s home for a gun, even though the defendant, in response to questioning, told them it was in his bedroom closet. 2006Cf. Commonwealth v. Martin, 444 Mass. 213, 215 , 217 n.2 (2005). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.