Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 263, § 7 (2026)

Acquittal; effect on subsequent charges

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 7. A person shall not be held to answer on a second indictment or complaint for a crime of which he has been acquitted upon the facts and merits; but he may plead such acquittal in bar of any subsequent prosecution for the same crime, notwithstanding any defect in the form or substance of the indictment or complaint on which he was acquitted.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 52 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1926–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Carlino, 865 N.E.2d 767 (Mass. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Carlino, 865 N.E.2d 767 (Mass. 2007). · cites it 2× “’ ” We conclude that the correct course is the one advanced by the Call and Gonzales cases, and by our own cases interpreting the Fifth Amendment, as well as those of other courts.”

Commonwealth v. Zanetti, 910 N.E.2d 869 (Mass. 2009). “See G. L. c. 263, § 7. We disagree. The judge submitted a specific verdict slip to the jury, allowing them to choose from the following options by marking the appropriate space beside each option: (1) “Not Guilty”; (2) “Guilty — Murder, First Degree,” and, indented and…”

Commonwealth v. Woods, 607 N.E.2d 1024 (Mass. 1993). · cites it 2× “477, 479 (1974), and our statutory law, see G. L. c. 263, § 7 (1990 ed.). The defendant contends that his prosecution in the second trial was barred on double jeopardy grounds under the “same conduct” test announced in Grady v.”

Commonwealth v. Brown, 24 N.E.3d 1025 (Mass. 2015). · cites it 3× “See G. L. c. 263, § 7. 15 The double jeopardy principle “protects against three specific evils — ‘a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and multiple punishments for the same offense.”

Choy v. Commonwealth, 927 N.E.2d 970 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 2× “See G. L. c. 263, § 7 (codifying protection against double jeopardy).”

Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 882 N.E.2d 298 (Mass. 2008). “477, 479 (1974); G. L. c. 263, § 7. Additionally, “[c]ertain double jeopardy concepts are no doubt embraced within the Massachusetts Constitution’s due process of law provisions .”

Commonwealth v. Funches, 397 N.E.2d 1097 (Mass. 1979). “See also G. L. c. 263, § 7. Both defendants moved for directed verdicts at the close of the prosecution’s case.”

Luk v. Commonwealth, 658 N.E.2d 664 (Mass. 1995). “G. L. c. 263, § 7 (1994 ed.). Although “[c]ommon law principles may provide greater protections than either the State or Federal Constitution requires,” Berry v.”

Commonwealth v. Nardone, 546 N.E.2d 359 (Mass. 1989). “” 6 The defendant does not rely on the protection against double jeopardy afforded by G. L. c. 263, § 7. We therefore do not consider that statute.”

Commonwealth v. Gray, 362 N.E.2d 543 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977). · cites it 2× “[3] It seems appropriate to point out at this juncture the analogous provision in the Massachusetts General Laws, G.L.c. 263, § 7, to which the defendant made no reference.”

Marshall v. Commonwealth, 977 N.E.2d 40 (Mass. 2012). “425 (2010); G. L. c. 263, § 7. This principle, however, “is not one rule but several, each applying to a different situation; and each .”

Commonwealth v. Elder, 452 N.E.2d 1104 (Mass. 1983). “See G. L. c. 263, § 7. 5 The defendant contends that the decision of the mistrial issue and the subsequent remand “functioned as a penalty wrought upon Mr.”

Show all 52 citing cases →

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.