Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278A, § 2 (2026)

Conditions for filing motion for forensic or scientific analysis; affect of chapter upon analysis under other circumstances

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 2. A person may file a motion for forensic or scientific analysis under this chapter if that person: (1) has been convicted of a criminal offense in a court of the commonwealth; (2) is incarcerated in a state prison, house of correction, is on parole or probation or whose liberty has been otherwise restrained as the result of a conviction; and (3) asserts factual innocence of the crime for which the person has been convicted.

This chapter shall not be construed to prohibit the performance of forensic or scientific analysis under any other circumstances, including by agreement between the person convicted of a criminal offense and the prosecuting attorney.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Williams, 119 N.E.3d 1171 (Mass. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Williams, 119 N.E.3d 1171 (Mass. 2019). · cites it 9× “G. L. c. 278A, § 2. Here, we address **800 whether the defendant, who claims that no crime occurred, may make a prima facie case for a chapter 278A request, which, as relevant here, includes (1) asserting factual innocence, and (2) providing information demonstrating that the…”

Commonwealth v. Johnson, 129 N.E.3d 841 (Mass. 2019). · cites it 16× “He seeks deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing of biological material pertaining to his only sex offense, of which he claims innocence.”

Commonwealth v. Wade, 5 N.E.3d 816 (Mass. 2014). “See G. L. c. 278A, § 2. On March 26, 2012, Wade filed a motion and affidavit pursuant to G.”

Commonwealth v. Clark, 34 N.E.3d 1 (Mass. 2015). “See G. L. c. 278A, § 2. The purpose of the act was “to remedy the injustice of wrongful convictions of factually innocent persons by allowing access to analyses of biological material with newer forensic and scientific techniques .”

Dist. Attorney for the N. Dist. v. Superior Court Dep't, 122 N.E.3d 1051 (Mass. 2019). “" G. L. c. 278A, § 16 ( a ). With these statutes and rules in mind, we conclude that Superior Court clerks' offices are responsible for maintaining exhibits posttrial unless a clerk's office satisfies a judge that there is good cause to believe retention would be impracticable.”

Commonwealth v. Kaio D. Rodrigues Da Silva. (Mass. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 3× “For the defendant to have standing to move for postconviction access to forensic and scientific analysis, 4 he must meet the requirements of G. L. c. 278A, § 2. This section states that "[a] person may file a motion for forensic or scientific analysis under this chapter if that…”

Commonwealth v. Tanner (Mass. 2026). · cites it 3× “" G. L. c. 278A, § 2. The second of these requirements -- phrased, as it is, in the present tense –- necessarily confines the class of eligible movants to persons who are alive at the time of filing.”

Commonwealth v. Duguay (Mass. 2023). “Years later, the defendant filed a motion for postconviction forensic and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis pursuant to G. L. c. 278A, § 2, which was allowed. Following the postconviction forensic analysis, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial.”

Commonwealth v. Lance Hullum. (Mass. App. Ct. 2024). “" On June 18, 2021, almost three years ago, a judge of the Superior Court issued a thorough and thoughtful nine-page opinion that took into consideration both the defendant's filings and the Commonwealth's filing, described by the judge as "argu[ing] that the defendant's motion…”

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.