green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
12.6 score
“redibility is for the fact finder, not an appellate court”
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Jablonski v. Casey
redibility is for the fact finder, not an appellate court
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jablonski v. Casey
“A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948); Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1014 (1992) (rescript) (credibility is for the fact finder, not the appellate court.) Even if there was a finding of material breach, Casey may at best have been entitled to an abatement of rent from the time the court determined York received notice (September 4) to the time of subs…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. Wade
Explicit statements that [the defendant] understood his rights and waived them [are] not essential. [However,] courts indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver of fundamental constitutional rights.” Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1015 (1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Reed v. Phillips
Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1014 (1002) (rescript) (credibility is for the fact finder, not the appellate court.) The court looked elsewhere for evidence on the issue of “keepership” and found it in the testimony of McDuffy who begrudgingly admitted that Phillips sometimes walked the dog, fed it and was alone with it on many occasions.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. Vuthy Seng
In this case, the Commonwealth did not meet its “ ‘heavy’ burden,” Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1015 (1992), of demonstrating that the defendant was advised of his rights in a meaningful way that he could comprehend.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. Rivera
As we held in Commonwealth v. Dunigan, 384 Mass. 1, 3-5 (1981), and thereafter in Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1014 (1992), no appeal lies from the denial by a single justice of an application for leave to appeal in these circumstances.
cited
Cited "see"
Powers v. Commonwealth
See Commonwealth v. Boncore, 412 Mass. 1013, 1014 (1992) (no appeal from denial by single justice of leave to appeal).
Paul N. Papas, Second
v.
Commonwealth
v.
Commonwealth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Jun 4, 1992.
The plaintiff, pro se, submitted a memorandum.
Published
There is no merit to this appeal because of the pendency of the same matter in the Appeals Court. Therefore, there is no relief available under G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1990 ed.). The single justice correctly denied relief in the county court.
Appeal dismissed.