Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 10/2/2001

Commonwealth v. Sheehan

Citations

435 Mass. 183
755 N.E.2d 1208
2001 Mass. LEXIS 498

How courts have described this case

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

applying Bishop to cases tried before Fuller principles were deemed to control proceedings
labeling defendant \predator\ who \picked the weak chick to prey upon\ was unwarranted
exclusion from evidence of complainant’s psychiatric records required new trial where Commonwealth’s case rested “almost entirely” on his testimony and evidence, if believed, might have had significant effect on outcome of trial
“To the extent that the records were damaging to the defense . . . , it was for defense counsel to decide whether their value outweighed their harm”
mental health records admissible where they “provide a basis for cross-examination about the possibility that these earlier events in [the alleged victim’s] life caused him to fantasize and have problems separating reality from fiction”
“To the extent that the records were damaging to the defense ... it was for defense counsel to decide whether their value outweighed their harm. Counsel was deprived of the ability to make that choice by the judge’s ruling”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cordy, Greaney, Sosman, Spina

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 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.