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 1971–2018 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Vailesgreen2 sentences1978In Commonwealth v. Vailes, supra at 524 , we said: “In those situations where there exists doubt as to whether the defendant satisfies this test [of competence], the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue. 1976When there is doubt as to whether the defendant satisfies this test, the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue (Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 385 [1966]; Commonwealth v. Vailes, supra at 524 ) and “[a] finding of incompetency shall require a preponderance of the evidence.” G. | 2 | 5 |
Pate v. Robinsongreen2 sentences1976When there is doubt as to whether the defendant satisfies this test, the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue ( Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 385 [1966]; Commonwealth v. Vailes, supra at 524 ) and "[a] finding of incompetency shall require a preponderance of the evidence." G.L.c. 123, § 15 ( d ), as amended through St. 1973, c. 569, § 7. 1976When there is doubt as to whether the defendant satisfies this test, the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue (Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 385 [1966]; Commonwealth v. Vailes, supra at 524 ) and “[a] finding of incompetency shall require a preponderance of the evidence.” G. | 1 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Hillgreen1 sentence1983See Commonwealth v. Hill, 375 Mass. 50, 62 (1978). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Kostkagreen1 sentence1983When the judge has doubt “as to whether the defendant satisfies this test, the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue.” Commonwealth v. Kostka, 370 Mass. 516, 522 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
Drope v. Missourigreen1 sentence1977In Drope v. Missouri, 420 U. S. 162, 171 (1975), the requirement has been stated thus: “It has long been accepted that a person whose mental condition is such that he lacks the capacity to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him, to consult with counsel, and to assist in preparing his defense, may not be subjected to a trial.” In those situations where there exists doubt whether the defendant satisfies the test enunciated in Dusky , the judge must, on his own initiative, conduct a full hearing on the issue. | 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. Segovia
green
1 sentence2018Commonwealth v. Segovia , supra . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Abramian v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
green
1 sentence2005Id. at 117-18 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
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.