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.
7 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2009 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. Jonesgreen1 sentence2002See Commonwealth v. Jones, 432 Mass. 623, 630 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Estevesgreen1 sentence2000See Commonwealth v. Esteves, 429 Mass. 636, 639 (1999). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Diazgreen1 sentence1999Commonwealth v. Diaz, 383 Mass. 73, 75-82 (1981). ‘.‘Nonconstitutional errors, preserved . . . below, are reviewed according to a nonprejudicial error standard. | 1 | 1 |
Yates v. Evattgreen1 sentence1998See Yates v. Evatt, 500 U.S. 391, 402-405 (1991); Commonwealth v. Garcia, 379 Mass. 422, 441-442 (1980). 2 Nonconstitutional errors, preserved or resurrected below, are reviewed according to a nonprejudicial error standard. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Garciagreen1 sentence1998See Yates v. Evatt, 500 U.S. 391, 402-405 (1991); Commonwealth v. Garcia, 379 Mass. 422, 441-442 (1980). 2 Nonconstitutional errors, preserved or resurrected below, are reviewed according to a nonprejudicial error standard. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hill v. Burdick
green
2 sentences2009As the defendant properly preserved the error, we review “according to a nonprejudicial error standard.” Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, 163 , cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998). 2005“Nonconstitutional errors, preserved or resurrected below, are reviewed according to a nonprejudicial error standard.” Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, 163 , cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998). | 4 | 1999–2009 |
Commonwealth v. Vinnie
green
2 sentences2009As the defendant properly preserved the error, we review “according to a nonprejudicial error standard.” Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, 163 , cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998). 2005“Nonconstitutional errors, preserved or resurrected below, are reviewed according to a nonprejudicial error standard.” Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, 163 , cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998). | 4 | 1999–2009 |
Commonwealth v. Flebotte
green
1 sentence1999An error is nonprejudicial only ‘[if] . . . the conviction is sure that the error did not influence the jury, or had but very slight effect . . . .’ ” Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, 163 , cert, denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998), quoting from Commonwealth v. Flebotte, 417 Mass. 348 ; 353 (1994). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.