Commonwealth v. Gurney

How courts have described this case

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

• no question that defendant was being treated with antipsychotic medication during trial
• prosecutor’s argument was permissible inference from facts presented at trial and not bolstering where he stated in closing that police officers and complainant were credible because their testimony was reasonable and they had no reason to target defendant with false accusations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Zagrodny
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2004-12-20· cited 33×
• Commonwealth v. Gaboriault
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2003-03-31· cited 26×
• Commonwealth v. Stewart
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2011-11-10· cited 16×
• State v. New
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-12-20· cited 7×
• Commonwealth v. Talbot
  Massachusetts Appeals Court· 1994-01-13· cited 7×
• Commonwealth v. Brown
  Massachusetts Superior Court· 1998-12-18

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Nordstrom
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1973-11-16· cited 70×
• Commonwealth v. Louraine
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1983-08-24· cited 47×
• Commonwealth v. Callahan
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-07-20· cited 20×
• Commonwealth v. Haskins
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1991-10-01· cited 13×