Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 6/18/1991

Commonwealth v. Harmon

Citations

573 N.E.2d 490
410 Mass. 425
1991 Mass. LEXIS 332

How courts have described this case

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

noting that the standard of appellate review does not change even though the judge adopted findings of fact from the Commonwealth’s memorandum of law
noting that the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts does “not recommend th[e] practice” of a judge adopting findings of fact from the Commonwealth’s memorandum of law
finding the taking of notes about incriminating statements did not mean, under the facts and circumstances, that the note-taker was an agent of the state
finding the taking of notes about incriminating statements did not mean, under the facts and circumstances, that the note-taker was an agent of the state
“we make an independent determination as to whether [the witness] was functioning as a government agent by applying constitutional principles to facts”
where only action attributable to government was suggestion that inmate \keep his ears open\ when around defendant, no agency relationship established

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Liacos, Abrams, Nolan, Lynch, Greaney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

22 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.