Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 263, § 1 (2026)

Nature of crime; right to be informed; penalty

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 1. Whoever is arrested by virtue of process, or whoever is taken into custody by an officer, has a right to know from the officer who arrests or claims to detain him the true ground on which the arrest is made; and an officer who refuses to answer a question relative to the reason for such arrest, or answers such question untruly, or assigns to the person arrested an untrue reason for the arrest, or neglects upon request to exhibit to the person arrested, or to any other person acting in his behalf, the precept by virtue of which such arrest has been made, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1925–2017 · leading case: United States v. Hector Magallon-Lopez, 817 F.3d 671 (9th Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Hector Magallon-Lopez, 817 F.3d 671 (9th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “Penal Code § 841 ; Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 263 § 1; N.C. Gen. Stat.”

Commonwealth v. Cantor, 149 N.E. 205 (Mass. 1925). “G. L. c. 263, §1. No reversible error is disclosed by the record in connection with the use, by the witness Stapleton, of a memorandum to refresh his recollection.”

Dep't of Revenue v. Shea, 885 N.E.2d 866 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008). “211, § 26A (judicial evaluation questionnaires shall include “questions relative to the judge’s performance, demeanor, judicial management skills, legal ability, attentiveness, bias and degree of preparedness”); G. L. c. 263, § 1 (requiring police officers to answer “questions…”

Commonwealth v. Cotilla, 10 Mass. L. Rptr. 197 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1999). · cites it 4× “He argues that because the police officers refused to give him the name of the victim of the rape at the time of his arrest, which he claims was in violation of G.L.c. 263, §1, his decision to waive his rights was not an “intelligent” choice.”

Commonwealth v. O'neill, 94 N.E.3d 878 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017). “" G. L. c. 263, § 1. G. L. c. 276, § 33. During closing argument, the prosecutor suggested that the jurors listen to their "gut feeling[s]" in assessing the credibility of the witnesses.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.