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.
9 Massachusetts opinions name it 3 courts 1997–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Amiraultgreen2 sentences2025"The defendant must then show that, taking the proceedings as a whole, the purpose and value of confrontation have not been sufficiently served and that as a result there is a substantial risk that the outcome of the trial would have been different." Id. at 651-652 . 2025Where, as here, a defendant has waived his claim of infringement of his right to confrontation, that "right drops out as a constitutional absolute." Commonwealth v. Amirault, 424 Mass. 618, 651 (1997) (Amirault II). | 1 | 1 |
Precision Etchings & Findings, Inc. v. Lgp Gem, Ltd., Maurice C. Feiger, Precision Etchings & Findings, Inc. v. Lgp Gem, Ltd., Maurice C. Feigergreen1 sentence2006“The common factors in a waiver of personal jurisdiction are ‘dilatoriness and participation in, or encouragement of, judicial proceedings.’ ” Lamarche v. Lussier, 65 Mass. App. Ct. 887, 889-890 (2006), quoting from Precision Etchings & Findings, Inc. v. LGP Gem, Ltd., 953 F.2d 21, 25 (1st Cir. 1992). | 1 | 1 |
Lamarche v. Lussiergreen1 sentence2006“The common factors in a waiver of personal jurisdiction are ‘dilatoriness and participation in, or encouragement of, judicial proceedings.’ ” Lamarche v. Lussier, 65 Mass. App. Ct. 887, 889-890 (2006), quoting from Precision Etchings & Findings, Inc. v. LGP Gem, Ltd., 953 F.2d 21, 25 (1st Cir. 1992). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Andersongreen1 sentence2003We think the record is adequate to consider the defendant’s argument, see Commonwealth v. Anderson, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 124 (2003), and therefore proceed to do so under the familiar standards set out in Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89, 96 (1974), and Commonwealth v. Satterfield, 373 Mass. 109, 115 (1977). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Saferiangreen1 sentence2003We think the record is adequate to consider the defendant’s argument, see Commonwealth v. Anderson, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 124 (2003), and therefore proceed to do so under the familiar standards set out in Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89, 96 (1974), and Commonwealth v. Satterfield, 373 Mass. 109, 115 (1977). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Berrygreen1 sentence2000That motion was filed in 1997, two years after our decision in Commonwealth v. Berry, 420 Mass. 95, 113 (1995), which explicitly stated that, whenever a jury might have reached a verdict of murder on the basis of a felony-murder theory, a concurrent sentence for the underlying felony is duplicative and cannot be imposed. | 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. Curtis
green
2 sentences1999See Commonwealth v. Amirault, supra at 646-647; Commonwealth v. Curtis, supra at 626 . 1997Commonwealth v. Curtis, 417 Mass. 619 , 624-625 n.4 (1994). | 2 | 1997–1999 |
Commonwealth v. LeFave
green
1 sentence2023In all noncapital cases,8 where a defendant has waived a claim of error, our review is limited to the substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice standard, which "calls for us to decide if we have a serious doubt whether the result of the trial might have been different had the error not been made."9 LeFave, 430 Mass. at 174 -175 & n.6. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Commonwealth v. Burton
green
1 sentence2011The defendant responds that no waiver occurred, reasoning that until this court decided Burton, 450 Mass. at 57-60 , in 2007 — well after both his trial and his direct appeal •— he could not have been expected to argue that armed home invasion as defined in § 18C, as amended by St. 1998, c. 180, § 57, the version of the statute that applied to the defendant, carried a maximum twenty-year sentence and therefore could be the predicate for felony-murder in the second degree only, and not for felony-murder in the first degree. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Wang v. Niakaros
green
1 sentence2010"A determination whether a defendant has waived the defense of personal jurisdiction closely tracks the inquiry related to determine whether noncompliance with rule 4 can be overlooked without violating due process requirements." Wang, supra at 172 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Commonwealth v. Satterfield
green
1 sentence2003We think the record is adequate to consider the defendant’s argument, see Commonwealth v. Anderson, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 124 (2003), and therefore proceed to do so under the familiar standards set out in Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89, 96 (1974), and Commonwealth v. Satterfield, 373 Mass. 109, 115 (1977). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.