Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 6/17/2011

Commonwealth v. Clarke

Citations

460 Mass. 30
949 N.E.2d 892
2011 Mass. LEXIS 444

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that Padilla “is the definitive application of an established constitutional standard on a case-by-case basis, incorporating evolving professional norms (on which the standard relies) to new facts. It is not the creation of a new constitutional rule.”
stating that “the defendant in Padilla sought only an application of Strickland that several courts had already reached”
explaining that “the Supreme Court in Padilla effectively changed the law in the nine circuit courts of the United States Court of Appeals that had previously addressed the issue”
concluding Padilla did not apply a new rule but merely extended Strickland
concluding Padilla did not apply a new rule but merely extended Strickland
\fail[ing] to ascertain that the defendant was not a United States citizen may be sufficient to satisfy the first prong of the Saferian standard\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cordy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

86 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

44 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.