Massachusetts Appeals Court· 8/7/1996
Commonwealth v. Campiti
Citations
- 41 Mass. App. Ct. 43
- 668 N.E.2d 1308
- 1996 Mass. App. LEXIS 762
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- no error to deny motion for new trial based on evidence of unrelated police misconduct
- judge did not err in denying defendant’s new trial motion because actions of State police officer convicted of embezzling money seized in drug investigations, including defendant’s, did not taint “in any way” evidence against defendant
- defendant not entitled to new trial where State police officer involved in investigation of defendant embezzled money from district attorney’s office to support gambling habit, but where such activity did not taint voluminous evidence against defendant
- if grand jury had been presented with allegations of two robberies of same victim on distinct dates and indicted on only one robbery, conviction on proof of only unindicted robbery would be impermissible
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Armstrong
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Commonwealth v. ScottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2014-03-05· cited 135×
- Commonwealth v. KnightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2002-08-12· cited 39×
- Commonwealth v. EllisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2000-12-06· cited 37×
- Campiti v. MatesanzFirst Circuit· 2003-06-27· cited 20×
- Commonwealth v. CottoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2015-04-08· cited 18×
- Commonwealth v. FernandezMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2000-02-08· cited 13×
- Campiti v. MatesanzD. Massachusetts· 2002-03-11· cited 8×
- Campiti v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1997-11-19· cited 8×
- Commonwealth v. RodriguezMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2006-10-30· cited 8×
- Commonwealth v. MegnaMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2003-10-06· cited 5×
- Commonwealth v. LeBlancMassachusetts Appeals Court· 2009-02-03· cited 4×
- Powers v. O'BRIEND. Massachusetts· 2010-07-29
Cites
40 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court· 1978-06-26· cited 8,679×
- Ungar v. SarafiteSupreme Court· 1964-05-04· cited 1,845×
- Commonwealth v. SaferianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1974-07-30· cited 1,208×
- Commonwealth v. GraceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1986-04-15· cited 371×
- Commonwealth v. ToneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-03-18· cited 186×
- Commonwealth v. CinelliMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1983-05-16· cited 179×
- Commonwealth v. TucceriMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1992-04-09· cited 145×
- Commonwealth v. VitelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1975-04-01· cited 142×
- Commonwealth v. SiresMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1992-07-29· cited 139×
- United States v. Ojeda RiosSupreme Court· 1990-04-30· cited 137×
- Commonwealth v. MamayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1990-05-15· cited 104×
- Commonwealth v. CronkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1985-11-12· cited 103×
- Commonwealth v. NealMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1984-05-21· cited 88×
- Commonwealth v. CavanaughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1976-09-07· cited 87×
- Commonwealth v. SnowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1930-01-06· cited 82×
- Commonwealth v. Nine Hundred & Ninety-Two DollarsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1981-06-23· cited 67×
- Commonwealth v. LykusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1989-11-20· cited 66×
- Commonwealth v. RichmondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1980-01-21· cited 60×
- Commonwealth v. LittleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1981-08-05· cited 59×
- Commonwealth v. BenjaminMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1971-02-09· cited 58×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.