Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 6/10/1996

Commonwealth v. Gordon

Citations

422 Mass. 816
666 N.E.2d 122
1996 Mass. LEXIS 137

How courts have described this case

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

declining to determine retroactive application of the Lanigan standard because disputed scientific testimony was admissible under the “somewhat more stringent” Frye standard
“The guarantees of open public proceedings in criminal trials cover proceedings for the voir dire examination of potential jurors concerning their qualifications to serve”
act did not require suppression of purely administrative booking video recording where it was not used as investigative tool
Commonwealth consumed evidence in course of testing blood stains; Commonwealth notified defendant of the possibility but defendant declined to send own expert
judge's preemption of Commonwealth's presentation of its case usurped decision-making authority constitutionally allocated to executive branch
“It is apparent from the preamble that the legislative focus was on the protection of privacy rights.... ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Connor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

53 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.