Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1/19/1982

Commonwealth v. Huffman

Citations

430 N.E.2d 1190
385 Mass. 122
1982 Mass. LEXIS 1254

How courts have described this case

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

no risk of destruction of evidence where marijuana packagers had no reason to believe police were investigating them
no exigency where no evidence officers would have been visible when looking into defendant’s apartment window from building across street
“We cannot speculate or go outside the record to justify the warrantless entry into a private residence”
exigency exists where there is reasonable basis to conclude that evidence will be destroyed or removed before police can obtain search warrant
exclusion of defendant’s testimony was erroneous where issue of his intent “was an essential element of the crime charged”
no exigent circumstances where “Commonwealth did not offer any evidence as to the time it would take to get a warrant, or indicate that it would be impractical to get one”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hennessey, Wilkins, Liacos, Abrams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.