Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265, § 28 (2026)

Poison; use with intent to injure; punishment

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 28. Whoever mingles poison with food, drink or medicine with intent to kill or injure another person, or wilfully poisons any spring, well or reservoir of water with such intent, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Walker, 812 N.E.2d 262 (Mass. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Walker, 812 N.E.2d 262 (Mass. 2004). · cites it 8× “We conclude that there was sufficient evidence for a rational jury to *187 find the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and that the definition of “poison” as used in G. L. c. 265, § 28, encompasses temazepam (the active ingredient in the defendant’s sleeping…”

Commonwealth v. Walker, 801 N.E.2d 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 7× “Next, the defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish that temazepam is a poison under G. L. c. 265, § 28. General Laws c. 265, § 28, reads, “Whoever mingles poison with food, drink or medicine with intent to kill or injure another person .”

State v. Weaver, 382 S.E.2d 327 (W. Va. 1989). “Penal Code § 347; Idaho Code § 18-5501 ; Mass.Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 265, § 28; Mich.Stat.”

Commonwealth v. Robert Kawada (Mass. Super. Ct. 2026). · cites it 3× “A grand jury indicted Robert Kawada alleging: (1) attempted poisoning in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 28; (2) assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon on a pregnant person in violation of G.”

Clarke v. Gonzales, 200 F. App'x 10 (1st Cir. 2006). “§ 1227 (a)(2)(A)(iii), that is, his February 7, 1986 conviction in state court of the crime of rape and abuse of a child, see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265, § 28 . The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the order of removal on January 30, 2006.”

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.